From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:41774) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Voj3u-0006r8-Ub for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 05 Dec 2013 19:14:36 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Voj3p-000832-2A for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 05 Dec 2013 19:14:30 -0500 Received: from terminus.zytor.com ([2001:1868:205::10]:38628 helo=mail.zytor.com) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Voj3o-00080c-Nm for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 05 Dec 2013 19:14:24 -0500 Message-ID: <52A10565.8070205@zytor.com> Date: Thu, 05 Dec 2013 14:59:49 -0800 From: "H. Peter Anvin" MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <52A0A4F7.2020508@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: <52A0A4F7.2020508@redhat.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 1/4] X86: Intel MPX definiation List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Paolo Bonzini , "Liu, Jinsong" Cc: kvm , Gleb Natapov , Xudong Hao , "qemu-devel@nongnu.org" , Ingo Molnar , Thomas Gleixner , "Ren, Qiaowei" On 12/05/2013 08:08 AM, Paolo Bonzini wrote: > Il 02/12/2013 17:43, Liu, Jinsong ha scritto: >> From fbfa537f690eca139a96c6b2636ab5130bf57716 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 >> From: Liu Jinsong >> Date: Fri, 29 Nov 2013 01:27:00 +0800 >> Subject: [PATCH 1/4] X86: Intel MPX definiation >> >> Signed-off-by: Xudong Hao >> Signed-off-by: Liu Jinsong >> --- >> arch/x86/include/asm/cpufeature.h | 2 ++ >> arch/x86/include/asm/xsave.h | 5 ++++- >> 2 files changed, 6 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-) >> > > hpa/Ingo/Thomas, can you give your Acked-by for this patch? > > I'm not sure of the consequences of changing XCNTXT_MASK. This series > (which was submitted with the wrong threading) wants it so that KVM can > use fpu_save_init and fpu_restore_checking to save and restore the MPX > state of the guest. > Hi, I'm currently reviewing internally another set of patches for MPX support which would at least in part conflict with these. I don't see the rest of the series -- where was it posted? Either way: 1. asm/cpufeatures.h patches should always be separate, as we put those into a special branch into the -tip tree since they touch so many other things. 2. Enabling MPX is only safe with XSTATE_EAGER, which Qiaowei's patchset has done correctly. -hpa