Re: [PATCH 4/7] x86: detect PIC aliasing on ports other than 0x[2A][01]

[Jan Beulich <jbeulich@xxxxxxxx>]

On 30.10.2023 16:23, Roger Pau Monné wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 30, 2023 at 04:19:22PM +0100, Jan Beulich wrote:
>> On 30.10.2023 16:14, Roger Pau Monné wrote:
>>> On Mon, Oct 30, 2023 at 01:24:52PM +0100, Jan Beulich wrote:
>>>> On 26.10.2023 17:19, Roger Pau Monné wrote:
>>>>> Maybe the issue is that PV_SHIM_EXCLUSIVE shouldn't have been a
>>>>> Kconfig option in the first place, and instead a specific Kconfig
>>>>> config file?
>>>>>
>>>>> Maybe it's not possible to achieve the same using just a Kconfig
>>>>> config file.
>>>>
>>>> I'm afraid I don't understand what you mean by "Kconfig config file". It
>>>> can't really be just another .../Kconfig file somewhere in the tree, as
>>>> it doesn't really matter where an option like this would be defined.
>>>
>>> No, I was thinking of splitting what PV_SHIM_EXCLUSIVE actually
>>> implies, for example by adding CONFIG_DOMCTL_HYPERCALLL or
>>> CONFIG_PLATFORM_HYPERCALL and re-work the pvshim_defconfig config file
>>> based on those, so that we don't end up with negative relations.
>>>
>>> Note sure all usages of PV_SHIM_EXCLUSIVE can be split in such a way,
>>> maybe we would need some compromise.
>>
>> Wouldn't such a CONFIG_DOMCTL_HYPERCALL then still want to depend on
>> !PV_SHIM_EXCLUSIVE, which is the kind of dependency we want to avoid?
>> Aiui the two (splitting and inverting) are largely orthogonal aspects.
> 
> No, CONFIG_DOMCTL_HYPERCALL could be promptless option enabled by
> default and disabled by the pvshim_defconfig.

pvshim_defconfig shouldn't play a role here. Anyone configuring a shim
build from scratch should also get a consistent set of settings. When
there's no prompt and default-enabling, I'm also having some difficulty
seeing how pvshim_defconfig could override that then.

Jan