Re: [PATCH v4 16/21] i386: track explicit 'hv-*' features enablement/disablement

[Vitaly Kuznetsov]

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