From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.6 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_INVALID, DKIM_SIGNED,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 38D8FC433DB for ; Mon, 15 Feb 2021 08:57:26 +0000 (UTC) Received: from lists.gnu.org (lists.gnu.org [209.51.188.17]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 71B1764E05 for ; Mon, 15 Feb 2021 08:57:25 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 71B1764E05 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=redhat.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=qemu-devel-bounces+qemu-devel=archiver.kernel.org@nongnu.org Received: from localhost ([::1]:59836 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lBZh6-0000Ig-Ew for qemu-devel@archiver.kernel.org; Mon, 15 Feb 2021 03:57:24 -0500 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:54238) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lBZgC-0008Ji-3Y for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 15 Feb 2021 03:56:28 -0500 Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com ([63.128.21.124]:58396) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lBZgA-0000uu-3V for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 15 Feb 2021 03:56:27 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1613379384; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=6LvpU7kfSaPM2aIRVCbiWSbWC9wwTxGYPBVnpxBToUY=; b=AeQCBMEXihtX85XxT/vh4pJ/BfGoZYSYwFRzOegg/MScPe9QHKPfyuXRK09SobYpUEZr7f j5rUnp4Voeh/XfxMrEsYYxhexet4Gqbp9eOr7cj+5sJUWNz+i+iEA1A/yqppk57+0FLSBN 2gQMS8mN5MfylrykC6OwZ76cqrjeryA= Received: from mail-wr1-f70.google.com (mail-wr1-f70.google.com [209.85.221.70]) (Using TLS) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP id us-mta-590-WwH9QnqINvCHqZuIMQTtzg-1; Mon, 15 Feb 2021 03:56:22 -0500 X-MC-Unique: WwH9QnqINvCHqZuIMQTtzg-1 Received: by mail-wr1-f70.google.com with SMTP id r5so9666659wrw.10 for ; Mon, 15 Feb 2021 00:56:21 -0800 (PST) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:mime-version; bh=6LvpU7kfSaPM2aIRVCbiWSbWC9wwTxGYPBVnpxBToUY=; b=Owg/9/HbuuO43cjFCHyemMXlQKhl0QBp6DkAZHcNyVlm9MfG2zG7DFx2EMBKNTtpmb 7++Au8BcJh17mZj8edOiBeyoeOJs0olcCs59LCfGAFR2NPboWlofSWDhSZCXj4AYrNJf IXSQRiL1dJe3jINmaTWD4V3pK+gg4tZALb2FP1iT432NYefCuGFkqK4WCFxa8taz11wb Nj8piDq3nWYITByEWl1kBkPaFftnapmY5qL6E57noRlofz5lzsjs+//oT47D+MFP9G2O 1cdfnd4/ix92lCK45d9lseWd2NOtnZWFHAt6bYwz0cdkKNbdynRs+vlkQooLlUHzXOfr ARyw== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM533TqHJG+RCswXFg1tQ93FTOQV5GpTUGDDp0B5FdnSUw0esY9JBQ 5+wR7TXuMoq0dHtA74iHfYZbMfK4sJZuQrJTsYfVl7gJi0afjIXJJY1hm7ukyUhjnPGepYSbIhU /o8+YSSKW8C+5De4= X-Received: by 2002:a1c:2094:: with SMTP id g142mr13538494wmg.101.1613379380817; Mon, 15 Feb 2021 00:56:20 -0800 (PST) X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJz+5iG8HacNkd3BWQHp0OqNcvKAoB99b+KY24Wn10ta7Lyt8TuAVIpSpA2+GA9SQjXSZfghpg== X-Received: by 2002:a1c:2094:: with SMTP id g142mr13538474wmg.101.1613379380600; Mon, 15 Feb 2021 00:56:20 -0800 (PST) Received: from vitty.brq.redhat.com (g-server-2.ign.cz. [91.219.240.2]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id m17sm5832868wmq.5.2021.02.15.00.56.19 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Mon, 15 Feb 2021 00:56:20 -0800 (PST) From: Vitaly Kuznetsov To: Igor Mammedov Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 16/21] i386: track explicit 'hv-*' features enablement/disablement In-Reply-To: <20210212170527.0e93e6b2@redhat.com> References: <20210210164033.607612-1-vkuznets@redhat.com> <20210210164033.607612-17-vkuznets@redhat.com> <20210211183555.2136b5c8@redhat.com> <87tuqhllmn.fsf@vitty.brq.redhat.com> <20210212151259.3db7406f@redhat.com> <87k0rdl3er.fsf@vitty.brq.redhat.com> <87h7mhl33o.fsf@vitty.brq.redhat.com> <20210212170527.0e93e6b2@redhat.com> Date: Mon, 15 Feb 2021 09:56:19 +0100 Message-ID: <87blcllnf0.fsf@vitty.brq.redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Authentication-Results: relay.mimecast.com; auth=pass smtp.auth=CUSA124A263 smtp.mailfrom=vkuznets@redhat.com X-Mimecast-Spam-Score: 0 X-Mimecast-Originator: redhat.com Content-Type: text/plain Received-SPF: pass client-ip=63.128.21.124; envelope-from=vkuznets@redhat.com; helo=us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com X-Spam_score_int: -27 X-Spam_score: -2.8 X-Spam_bar: -- X-Spam_report: (-2.8 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H4=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: qemu-devel@nongnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: Paolo Bonzini , drjones@redhat.com, Marcelo Tosatti , qemu-devel@nongnu.org, Eduardo Habkost Errors-To: qemu-devel-bounces+qemu-devel=archiver.kernel.org@nongnu.org Sender: "Qemu-devel" Igor Mammedov writes: > On Fri, 12 Feb 2021 16:26:03 +0100 > Vitaly Kuznetsov wrote: > >> Vitaly Kuznetsov writes: >> >> > Igor Mammedov 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). > that's also an option, > we would need to make sure that hv-passthrough is mutually exclusive > with ''all'' other hv- properties to avoid above combination being > ever (mis)used. That's an option to finally get these patches merged, not a good option for end users. 'hv-passthrough,hv-feature' works today and it's useful. Should we drop it? 'hv-passthrough/hv-default' and 'hv-passthrough/hv-default,hv-evmcs' should give us sane results. 'hv-passthrough,hv-feature=off' is convenient. Why droppping this all? To save 9 (nine) lines of code in the parser? -- Vitaly