Re: [PATCH for-next 5/6] xen: Add files needed for minimal riscv build

[Bob Eshleman <bobbyeshleman@xxxxxxxxx>]

On 2/25/21 3:14 PM, Andrew Cooper wrote:
> 
> Well - this is orders of magnitude more complicated than it ought to
> be.  An empty head.S doesn't (well - shouldn't) need the overwhelming
> majority of this.
> 
> Do you know how all of this is being pulled in?  Is it from attempting
> to compile common/ by any chance?
> 
> Now is also an excellent opportunity to nuke the x86isms which have
> escaped into common code (debugger and xenoprof in particular), and
> rethink some of our common/arch split.
> 
> When it comes to header files specifically, I want to start using
> xen/arch/$ARCH/include/asm/ and retrofit this to x86 and ARM.  It has
> two important properties - first, that you don't need to symlink the
> tree to make compilation work, and second that patches touching multiple
> architectures have hunks ordered in a more logical way.
> 
> ~Andrew
> 

I think we may have envisioned different things here....  I was under
the impression that we wanted to implicate common, so that changes
there that broke the RISC-V build would present themselves on CI...
and to demonstrate which "arch_*" calls common expects to exist.

It sounds like you'd prefer no common to start and none of the
arch_* calls it relies on?