From: Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com>
To: "Chang S. Bae" <chang.seok.bae@intel.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kvm@vger.kernel.org,
pbonzini@redhat.com, stable@vger.kernel.org,
Zhao Liu <zhao1.liu@intel.com>,
Binbin Wu <binbin.wu@linux.intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] KVM: x86: Remove AMX-TF32 enumeration
Date: Mon, 27 Jul 2026 08:27:19 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <amd419IkCNqnHhdz@google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <52cd5021-0290-401e-85d8-bdff0d07a9f7@intel.com>
On Thu, Jul 23, 2026, Chang S. Bae wrote:
> On 7/23/2026 11:04 AM, Sean Christopherson wrote:
> >
> > I'm not convinced that yanking out support is the right move. By publishing the
> > feature, for several years, Intel pretty much burned that CPUID bit. E.g. it's
> > not impossible that someone other than Intel has implemented TF32 instructions.
> >
> > The opcodes are fair game in the future, because their use can be qualified and
> > guarded, but the same doesn't hold true for enumeration. E.g. similar to how
> > MPX got ripped out and its XSTATE assets got reused for APX, but the CPUID feature
> > enumeration is forever reserved for MPX (I hope).
> >
> > If the argument is that "Intel Architecture Instruction Set Extensions and Future
> > Features" isn't binding documentation, i.e. that Intel can do take backs until a
> > feature is documented in the SDM, then I honestly don't see any option but to
> > refuse to accept new features until they land in the SDM. Which I don't think
> > any of us want.
> One distinction I could think of is whether a feature ever ships in
> implementations. If a feature is actually implemented and is later
> deprecated or removed, then I agree the bit should remain reserved. That
> appears quite clear.
Per Christian, who's mail client apparently doesn't use In-Reply-To and breaks
threading for me and lore, TF32 made it into a shipped product[*].
So "officially", NAK.
[*] https://lore.kernel.org/all/CAKSQd8V%3DwfVrUxeU%2BfDRgKJBLdiyCkkY2SRY%2BOoRBNE68LFnCg@mail.gmail.com
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-07-27 15:27 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-07-20 20:52 [PATCH v2] KVM: x86: Remove AMX-TF32 enumeration Chang S. Bae
2026-07-21 0:37 ` Xiaoyao Li
2026-07-23 18:04 ` Sean Christopherson
2026-07-23 19:44 ` Chang S. Bae
2026-07-27 15:27 ` Sean Christopherson [this message]
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2026-07-24 15:37 Christian Ludloff
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=amd419IkCNqnHhdz@google.com \
--to=seanjc@google.com \
--cc=binbin.wu@linux.intel.com \
--cc=chang.seok.bae@intel.com \
--cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=pbonzini@redhat.com \
--cc=stable@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=zhao1.liu@intel.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