From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Paolo Bonzini Subject: Re: Should KVM_GUEST stop depending on PARAVIRT? Date: Wed, 29 Jul 2015 11:41:26 +0200 Message-ID: <55B89FC6.2050101@redhat.com> References: <55B63933.4090702@redhat.com> <55B66F42.3000202@redhat.com> <55B678B5.8040602@redhat.com> <55B75225.8080505@redhat.com> <20150729091920.GK19282@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net> <55B89BB9.1060102@redhat.com> <20150729094015.GL19282@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Andy Lutomirski , KVM list , Arjan van de Ven To: Peter Zijlstra Return-path: Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:50605 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750784AbbG2Jla (ORCPT ); Wed, 29 Jul 2015 05:41:30 -0400 In-Reply-To: <20150729094015.GL19282@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net> Sender: kvm-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On 29/07/2015 11:40, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > > Well, people have complained about it because it's KERN_ERR. Do you > > think it is okay to downgrade this (perhaps not even just on VMs) to info? > > Ah, do people really have nothing better to do? ;-) Seems like a petty > complaint. > > Sure, it seems our check_hw_exists() does the same thing: > > printk("%sFailed to access perfctr msr (MSR %x is %Lx)\n", > boot_cpu_has(X86_FEATURE_HYPERVISOR) ? KERN_INFO : KERN_ERR, > reg, val_new); > > so ERR for real hardware, INFO for hypervisor thingies. Great, I'll send a patch then! Paolo