[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [PATCH v4 16/21] i386: track explicit 'hv-*' features enablement/dis
From: |
Vitaly Kuznetsov |
Subject: |
Re: [PATCH v4 16/21] i386: track explicit 'hv-*' features enablement/disablement |
Date: |
Fri, 12 Feb 2021 16:26:03 +0100 |
Vitaly Kuznetsov <vkuznets@redhat.com> writes:
> Igor Mammedov <imammedo@redhat.com> writes:
>
>>
>> Please try reusing scratch CPU approach, see
>> kvm_arm_get_host_cpu_features()
>> for an example. You will very likely end up with simpler series,
>> compared to reinventing wheel.
>
> Even if I do that (and I serioulsy doubt it's going to be easier than
> just adding two 'u64's, kvm_arm_get_host_cpu_features() alone is 200
> lines long) this is not going to give us what we need to distinguish
> between
>
> 'hv-passthrough,hv-evmcs'
>
> and
>
> 'hv-passthrough'
>
> when 'hv-evmcs' *is* supported by the host. When guest CPU lacks VMX we
> don't want to enable it unless it was requested explicitly (former but
> not the later).
... and if for whatever reason we decide that this is also bad/not
needed, I can just drop patches 16-18 from the series (leaving
'hv-passthrough,hv-feature=off' problem to better times).
--
Vitaly
- [PATCH v4 06/21] i386: introduce hv_cpuid_get_host(), (continued)
- [PATCH v4 06/21] i386: introduce hv_cpuid_get_host(), Vitaly Kuznetsov, 2021/02/10
- [PATCH v4 11/21] i386: switch hyperv_expand_features() to using error_setg(), Vitaly Kuznetsov, 2021/02/10
- [PATCH v4 12/21] i386: adjust the expected KVM_GET_SUPPORTED_HV_CPUID array size, Vitaly Kuznetsov, 2021/02/10
- [PATCH v4 10/21] i386: move eVMCS enablement to hyperv_init_vcpu(), Vitaly Kuznetsov, 2021/02/10
- [PATCH v4 13/21] i386: prefer system KVM_GET_SUPPORTED_HV_CPUID ioctl over vCPU's one, Vitaly Kuznetsov, 2021/02/10
- [PATCH v4 16/21] i386: track explicit 'hv-*' features enablement/disablement, Vitaly Kuznetsov, 2021/02/10
- Re: [PATCH v4 16/21] i386: track explicit 'hv-*' features enablement/disablement, Igor Mammedov, 2021/02/11
- Re: [PATCH v4 16/21] i386: track explicit 'hv-*' features enablement/disablement, Vitaly Kuznetsov, 2021/02/12
- Re: [PATCH v4 16/21] i386: track explicit 'hv-*' features enablement/disablement, Igor Mammedov, 2021/02/12
- Re: [PATCH v4 16/21] i386: track explicit 'hv-*' features enablement/disablement, Vitaly Kuznetsov, 2021/02/12
- Re: [PATCH v4 16/21] i386: track explicit 'hv-*' features enablement/disablement,
Vitaly Kuznetsov <=
- Re: [PATCH v4 16/21] i386: track explicit 'hv-*' features enablement/disablement, Igor Mammedov, 2021/02/12
- Re: [PATCH v4 16/21] i386: track explicit 'hv-*' features enablement/disablement, Vitaly Kuznetsov, 2021/02/15
- Re: [PATCH v4 16/21] i386: track explicit 'hv-*' features enablement/disablement, Igor Mammedov, 2021/02/15
- Re: [PATCH v4 16/21] i386: track explicit 'hv-*' features enablement/disablement, Igor Mammedov, 2021/02/15
- Re: [PATCH v4 16/21] i386: track explicit 'hv-*' features enablement/disablement, Vitaly Kuznetsov, 2021/02/15
- Re: [PATCH v4 16/21] i386: track explicit 'hv-*' features enablement/disablement, Igor Mammedov, 2021/02/12
- Re: [PATCH v4 16/21] i386: track explicit 'hv-*' features enablement/disablement, Vitaly Kuznetsov, 2021/02/15
- Re: [PATCH v4 16/21] i386: track explicit 'hv-*' features enablement/disablement, Andrew Jones, 2021/02/15
- Re: [PATCH v4 16/21] i386: track explicit 'hv-*' features enablement/disablement, Igor Mammedov, 2021/02/15
- Re: [PATCH v4 16/21] i386: track explicit 'hv-*' features enablement/disablement, Vitaly Kuznetsov, 2021/02/15