Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] pvshim: introduce a PV shim defconfig

["Jan Beulich" <JBeulich@xxxxxxxx>]

>>> On 22.08.18 at 12:36, <roger.pau@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/xen/arch/x86/configs/pvshim_defconfig
> @@ -0,0 +1,23 @@
> +# Enable PV shim mode
> +CONFIG_PV=y
> +CONFIG_XEN_GUEST=y
> +CONFIG_PVH_GUEST=y
> +CONFIG_PV_SHIM=y
> +CONFIG_PV_SHIM_EXCLUSIVE=y
> +# Disable features not used by the PV shim
> +CONFIG_NR_CPUS=32
> +CONFIG_SHADOW_PAGING=n
> +CONFIG_BIGMEM=n
> +CONFIG_HVM_FEP=n
> +CONFIG_TBOOT=n
> +CONFIG_KEXEC=n
> +CONFIG_TMEM=n
> +CONFIG_XENOPROF=n
> +CONFIG_XSM=n
> +CONFIG_SCHED_CREDIT2=n
> +CONFIG_SCHED_RTDS=n
> +CONFIG_SCHED_ARINC653=n
> +CONFIG_SCHED_NULL=n
> +CONFIG_LIVEPATCH=n
> +CONFIG_SUPPRESS_DUPLICATE_SYMBOL_WARNINGS=n
> +CONFIG_DEBUG=n

Since the *defconfig-s we have so far are all empty, and since the
Linux x86 ones aren't written this way I wonder: Is there a reason
you use "=n" instead of the "# CONFIG_... is not set" form?

Jan



_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.xenproject.org/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel