From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 3/3] X86,
 mpx: Intel MPX xstate feature definition
Date: Fri, 06 Dec 2013 17:07:12 -0800
Message-ID: <52A274C0.4010509@zytor.com>
References: <1386375658-2191-1-git-send-email-qiaowei.ren@intel.com>	<1386375658-2191-3-git-send-email-qiaowei.ren@intel.com>
	<52A20AD6.8080706@redhat.com>
	<DE8DF0795D48FD4CA783C40EC82923350140B3B6@SHSMSX101.ccr.corp.intel.com>
	<52A242BE.3010701@zytor.com>
	<DE8DF0795D48FD4CA783C40EC82923350140BB62@SHSMSX101.ccr.corp.intel.com>
	<9E0BE1322F2F2246BD820DA9FC397ADE014A6115@SHSMSX102.ccr.corp.intel.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: "kvm@vger.kernel.org" <kvm@vger.kernel.org>,
	"x86@kernel.org" <x86@kernel.org>, Xudong Hao <xudong.hao@intel.com>,
	"qemu-devel@nongnu.org" <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>,
	"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
To: "Ren, Qiaowei" <qiaowei.ren@intel.com>,
	"Liu, Jinsong" <jinsong.liu@intel.com>, Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
Return-path: <qemu-devel-bounces+gceq-qemu-devel=gmane.org@nongnu.org>
In-Reply-To: <9E0BE1322F2F2246BD820DA9FC397ADE014A6115@SHSMSX102.ccr.corp.intel.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/options/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:qemu-devel@nongnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: qemu-devel-bounces+gceq-qemu-devel=gmane.org@nongnu.org
Sender: qemu-devel-bounces+gceq-qemu-devel=gmane.org@nongnu.org
List-Id: kvm.vger.kernel.org

On 12/06/2013 04:23 PM, Ren, Qiaowei wrote:
>>>
>>> We need to either disable these features in lazy mode, or we need to
>>> force eager mode if these features are to be supported.  The problem
>>> with the latter is that it means forcing eager mode regardless of if
>>> anything actually *uses* these features.
>>>
>>> A third option would be to require applications to use a prctl() or
>>> similar to enable eager-save features.
>>>
>>
>> The third option seems better -- how does native mpx patches work, force
>> eager?
>>
> It should be the second option, as you can see xsave.c which we remove from this patch. :)
> 

Ah yes... I missed the fact that that chunk had been dropped from this
patch.  It really shouldn't be.

I'll substitute the previous version of the patch.

	-hpa