[PATCH 0/2] RISC-V: KVM: Require alternatives

[Andrew Jones]

On Thu, Mar 23, 2023 at 05:57:14PM +0000, Conor Dooley wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 22, 2023 at 07:40:14PM +0000, Conor Dooley wrote:
> > On Wed, Mar 22, 2023 at 08:28:56PM +0100, Andrew Jones wrote:
> > > KVM makes use of riscv_has_extension_unlikely() to check for the
> > > svinval extension. riscv_has_extension_unlikely() is built on
> > > alternatives, which means KVM should ensure alternatives support
> > > is available.
> > > 
> > > The first patch takes the opportunity to cleanup KVM's select
> > > list. The second patch selects RISCV_ALTERNATIVE.
> > 
> > Reminds me, I need to re-submit my patch doing that for the top-level
> > RISC-V Kconfig...
> > For the pair:
> > Reviewed-by: Conor Dooley <conor.dooley at microchip.com>
> 
> Actually, I would like to take this back for patch 2.
> Per the discussion on the other thread about XIP [1], I don't think
> that KVM should be selecting alternatives like this.
> Would you mind if I picked up these patches & submitted them as a v2,
> alongside a patch trying to make sure that we do not clip the wings of
> of XIP kernels by selecting RISCV_ALTERNATIVE?

Hi Conor,

I take it that resubmitting these patches is no longer part of the plan.
Should I rebase on "[PATCH v1 0/2] RISC-V: Fixes for
riscv_has_extension[un]likely()'s alternative dependency" and change the
select to a depends on?

Thanks,
drew