Re: [RFC PATCH 1/2] bulk: Replace !CONFIG_SOFTMMU -> CONFIG_USER_ONLY

[Richard Henderson]

On 6/5/23 13:29, Philippe Mathieu-Daudé wrote:
> On 3/6/23 05:49, Richard Henderson wrote:
> > On 6/2/23 15:58, Philippe Mathieu-Daudé wrote:
> > > CONFIG_USER_ONLY is the opposite of CONFIG_SOFTMMU.
> > > Replace !CONFIG_SOFTMMU negation by the positive form
> > > which is clearer when reviewing code.
> >
> > CONFIG_SOFTMMU should be reserved for the actual softmmu tlb, which we *should* be able 
> > to enable for user-only.  It is the only way to handle some of our host/guest page size 
> > problems.  Further, CONFIG_SOFTMMU should go away as a #define and become a runtime test 
> > (forced to true for system mode).  Pie in the sky stuff.
>
> This would be:
>
>    bool has_softmmu(void)
>    {
>    #ifdef CONFIG_USER_ONLY
>        /* TODO: implement */
>        return false;
>    #else
>        return true;
>    #endif
>    }
>
> ?

Yes, something like that.


r~