[Intel-gfx] [PATCH v3] drm/i915/gvt: declare gvt as i915's soft dependency

[Hang Yuan]

On 07/05/2018 03:21 PM, Zhenyu Wang wrote:
> On 2018.07.04 11:07:45 +0800, intel-gfx-bounces at lists.freedesktop.org wrote:
>> From: Hang Yuan <hang.yuan at linux.intel.com>
>>
>> This helps initramfs builder and other tools to know the full dependencies
>> of i915 and have gvt module loaded with i915.
>>
>> v2: add condition and change to pre-dependency (Chris)
>> v3: move declaration to gvt.c. (Chris)
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Hang Yuan <hang.yuan at linux.intel.com>
>> ---
>>   drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gvt/gvt.c | 7 +++++++
>>   1 file changed, 7 insertions(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gvt/gvt.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gvt/gvt.c
>> index 4e65266..00f487e9 100644
>> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gvt/gvt.c
>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gvt/gvt.c
>> @@ -468,3 +468,10 @@ int intel_gvt_init_device(struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv)
>>   	kfree(gvt);
>>   	return ret;
>>   }
>> +
>> +#if IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_DRM_I915_GVT_KVMGT)
>> +MODULE_SOFTDEP("pre: kvmgt");
>> +#elif IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_DRM_I915_GVT_XENGT)
>> +MODULE_SOFTDEP("pre: xengt");
>> +#endif
>> +
> 
> Why xengt? it's not in upstream at all, so should be splitted and
> apply to its topic branch only.
Henry: I understand xengt_mpt is not in upstream but general part of gvt 
like gvt.c is in upstream.
The change of the patch is in the general part. Do you think so?