On 21.11.2025 11:58, Penny Zheng wrote: > As we're aiming at moving away from PV_SHIM_EXCLUSIVE=y, we are > moving MGMT_HYPERCALLS out of it.
How are we "moving away from PV_SHIM_EXCLUSIVE=y"? It's the "depends on !PV_SHIM_EXCLUSIVE" (and related Makefile constructs) which we decided to get rid of. > --- a/xen/arch/x86/Makefile > +++ b/xen/arch/x86/Makefile > @@ -30,6 +30,7 @@ obj-bin-y += dmi_scan.init.o > obj-y += domain.o > obj-bin-y += dom0_build.init.o > obj-y += domain_page.o > +obj-$(CONFIG_MGMT_HYPERCALLS) += domctl.o > obj-y += e820.o > obj-y += emul-i8254.o > obj-y += extable.o > @@ -79,7 +80,6 @@ obj-$(CONFIG_VM_EVENT) += vm_event.o > obj-y += xstate.o > > ifneq ($(CONFIG_PV_SHIM_EXCLUSIVE),y) > -obj-$(CONFIG_MGMT_HYPERCALLS) += domctl.o > obj-y += platform_hypercall.o > obj-$(CONFIG_COMPAT) += x86_64/platform_hypercall.o > endif A change like this fits under the subject. > --- a/xen/arch/x86/hvm/Kconfig > +++ b/xen/arch/x86/hvm/Kconfig > @@ -1,6 +1,5 @@ > menuconfig HVM > bool "HVM support" > - depends on !PV_SHIM_EXCLUSIVE > default !PV_SHIM > select COMPAT > select IOREQ_SERVER This, however, is entirely unrelated afaics. > --- a/xen/arch/x86/include/asm/paging.h > +++ b/xen/arch/x86/include/asm/paging.h > @@ -55,7 +55,7 @@ > #define PG_translate 0 > #define PG_external 0 > #endif > -#if defined(CONFIG_PAGING) && !defined(CONFIG_PV_SHIM_EXCLUSIVE) && > defined(CONFIG_MGMT_HYPERCALLS) > +#if defined(CONFIG_PAGING) && defined(CONFIG_MGMT_HYPERCALLS) > /* Enable log dirty mode */ > #define PG_log_dirty (XEN_DOMCTL_SHADOW_ENABLE_LOG_DIRTY << PG_mode_shift) > #else Whereas this could fit here if the subject was e.g. "decouple PV_SHIM_EXCLUSIVE and MGMT_HYPERCALLS". Further, because of prior issue: Can you please clarify that you have tried builds with all (possible) combinations of the involved Kconfig settings? The set isn't that big, so exhaustive testing is possible. Jan
