From: Manali Shukla <manali.shukla@amd.com>
To: Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com>
Cc: kvm@vger.kernel.org, linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org,
pbonzini@redhat.com, shuah@kernel.org, nikunj@amd.com,
thomas.lendacky@amd.com, vkuznets@redhat.com, bp@alien8.de,
babu.moger@amd.com
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v2 1/5] x86/cpu: Add virt tag in /proc/cpuinfo
Date: Thu, 3 Oct 2024 16:35:06 +0530 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <d6b59dfe-9566-4164-9b64-28bd2c3f806f@amd.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <ZvwmA-Z_T44zcSJZ@google.com>
On 10/1/2024 10:11 PM, Sean Christopherson wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 01, 2024, Manali Shukla wrote:
>> Add support for generating Virtualization feature names in capflags.c
>> and use the resulting x86_virt_flags to print the virt flags in
>> /proc/cpuinfo.
>>
>> Currently, it is difficult to check if a feature is supported in _KVM_.
>> Manually querying cpuid to know whether the feature is supported or not
>> can be quite tedious at times.
>>
>> Print the features supported in KVM hypervisor in a dedicated "virt"
>> line instead of adding them to the common "flags".
>
> First off, printing flags in a separate section doesn't magically connect them
> to KVM support. E.g. if you cut this series after patch 2, BUS_LOCK_THRESHOLD
> will show up in "virt" despite KVM not supporting the feature.
>
> Second, deviating from the X86_FEATURE_* syntax will make it _harder_ for KVM to
> manage its configuration.
>
> Third, this is completely orthogonal to supporting bus lock threshold in KVM,
> i.e. belongs in a separate series.
Okay. I agree to your point. I will remove the patch from this series.
-Manali
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-10-03 11:05 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-10-01 6:34 [RFC PATCH v2 0/5] Add support for the Bus Lock Threshold Manali Shukla
2024-10-01 6:34 ` [RFC PATCH v2 1/5] x86/cpu: Add virt tag in /proc/cpuinfo Manali Shukla
2024-10-01 16:41 ` Sean Christopherson
2024-10-03 11:05 ` Manali Shukla [this message]
2024-10-01 6:34 ` [RFC PATCH v2 2/5] x86/cpufeatures: Add CPUID feature bit for the Bus Lock Threshold Manali Shukla
2024-10-01 6:34 ` [RFC PATCH v2 3/5] KVM: SVM: Enable Bus lock threshold exit Manali Shukla
2024-10-01 13:43 ` Tom Lendacky
2024-10-03 11:08 ` Manali Shukla
2024-10-01 6:34 ` [RFC PATCH v2 4/5] KVM: X86: Add documentation about behavioral difference for KVM_EXIT_BUS_LOCK Manali Shukla
2024-10-01 6:34 ` [RFC PATCH v2 5/5] KVM: selftests: Add bus lock exit test Manali Shukla
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=d6b59dfe-9566-4164-9b64-28bd2c3f806f@amd.com \
--to=manali.shukla@amd.com \
--cc=babu.moger@amd.com \
--cc=bp@alien8.de \
--cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=nikunj@amd.com \
--cc=pbonzini@redhat.com \
--cc=seanjc@google.com \
--cc=shuah@kernel.org \
--cc=thomas.lendacky@amd.com \
--cc=vkuznets@redhat.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox