>>> On 13.09.18 at 18:38, <[email protected]> wrote: > Signed-off-by: Wei Liu <[email protected]> > --- > v4: remove a blank line > v3: longer text > v2: use tab to indent > > Haven't added a dependency on PV_SHIM_EXCLUSIVE because agreement is > not yet reached. > > CC more people for opinions. > > Cc: Andrew Cooper <[email protected]> > Cc: George Dunlap <[email protected]> > Cc: Ian Jackson <[email protected]> > Cc: Jan Beulich <[email protected]> > Cc: Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <[email protected]> > Cc: Stefano Stabellini <[email protected]> > Cc: Tim Deegan <[email protected]> > Cc: Juergen Gross <[email protected]> > > I don't have an opinion here, that's why I didn't reply to previous > threads. > > Maybe > > def_bool y if !PV_SHIM_EXCLUSIVE > > is a good compromise?
Well, that's the minimum I can live with, but I won't ack a patch without the earlier suggested "depends on". However, not need for "if ..." here, just using "def_bool !PV_SHIM_EXCLUSIVE" should be quite fine as long as there's an always visible prompt. Note also that ordering within the various Kconfig* files may matter with this approach, at least when processing things sequentially (like is happening for the "oldconfig" target, for example): The wrong default would probably be suggested if PV_SHIM_EXCLUSIVE has not been given a value yet by the time HVM is getting prompted for. Jan _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.xenproject.org/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel
