From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from gate.crashing.org (gate.crashing.org [63.228.1.57]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DAA1E2C008D for ; Wed, 26 Sep 2012 06:59:55 +1000 (EST) Message-ID: <1348606771.7937.8.camel@pasglop> Subject: Re: Probing for native availability of isel from userspace From: Benjamin Herrenschmidt To: Segher Boessenkool Date: Wed, 26 Sep 2012 06:59:31 +1000 In-Reply-To: References: <50EE7AAC-3080-4B1B-B741-E3F7F5A57A73@kernel.crashing.org> <20120922102151.GA31314@visitor2.iram.es> <1348343737.1132.74.camel@pasglop> <35A5B006-1E4E-4355-A6A4-CA5F7371D21C@kernel.crashing.org> <20120924075546.GA4263@visitor2.iram.es> <1348473517.1132.87.camel@pasglop> <20120924080633.GA8127@visitor2.iram.es> <1348479715.1132.91.camel@pasglop> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Mime-Version: 1.0 Cc: malc , linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, hollis@penguinppc.org List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On Tue, 2012-09-25 at 15:17 +0200, Segher Boessenkool wrote: > >> Fine. But I believe that mfpvr emulation came first, which is the > >> point > >> I object to (see the mess that the fact that CPUID is available to > >> applications made to x86 when SSE registers were added). > > > > Heh, possibly, I don't remember... I added the cputable, I think we > > added mfpvr because we didn't have anything, then I added cputable > > which > > got us the HW caps, but some old stuff still relied on mfpvr so we > > couldn't completely remove it. > > If I have my history right end up, MFPVR emulation was added for MoL. > Which is funny (if you like that kind of thing) because it now hurts > all other "hypervisor in userspace" kind of things, that might want > to lie in their emulated PVR... Are you sure ? MOL had a kernel module, it wouldn't have needed that... Cheers, Ben.