Re: [PATCH 83/84] exec/poison: Do not poison CONFIG_SOFTMMU

[Thomas Huth]

On 08/05/2023 16.27, Thomas Huth wrote:
> On 03/05/2023 09.23, Richard Henderson wrote:
> > If CONFIG_USER_ONLY is ok generically, so is CONFIG_SOFTMMU,
> > because they are exactly opposite.
>
> I thought there was a difference ... at least in the past?
> But looking at meson.build they seem to be handled quite equally now:
>
> common_ss.add_all(when: 'CONFIG_SOFTMMU', if_true: [softmmu_ss])
> common_ss.add_all(when: 'CONFIG_USER_ONLY', if_true: user_ss)
>
> Paolo, do you remember whether there was a difference in the past?
>
> Anyway, as far as I can see, it should be fine now, so:
>
> Reviewed-by: Thomas Huth <thuth@redhat.com>

For the records, I withdraw my Reviewed-by here (since we should rather do 
it the other way round and poison CONFIG_USER_ONLY instead):

Nacked-by: Thomas Huth <thuth@redhat.com>