From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.0 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_INVALID,DKIM_SIGNED, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS, URIBL_BLOCKED,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B083FC3A589 for ; Sun, 18 Aug 2019 19:46:56 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7FA4921873 for ; Sun, 18 Aug 2019 19:46:56 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (1024-bit key) header.d=shipmail.org header.i=@shipmail.org header.b="AOwH3yEK" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1727194AbfHRTqz (ORCPT ); Sun, 18 Aug 2019 15:46:55 -0400 Received: from ste-pvt-msa1.bahnhof.se ([213.80.101.70]:34998 "EHLO ste-pvt-msa1.bahnhof.se" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726952AbfHRTqz (ORCPT ); Sun, 18 Aug 2019 15:46:55 -0400 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ste-pvt-msa1.bahnhof.se (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0F77D3F398; Sun, 18 Aug 2019 21:46:53 +0200 (CEST) Authentication-Results: ste-pvt-msa1.bahnhof.se; dkim=pass (1024-bit key; unprotected) header.d=shipmail.org header.i=@shipmail.org header.b=AOwH3yEK; dkim-atps=neutral X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at bahnhof.se Received: from ste-pvt-msa1.bahnhof.se ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (ste-pvt-msa1.bahnhof.se [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id hq_vKa0TXAWL; Sun, 18 Aug 2019 21:46:52 +0200 (CEST) Received: from mail1.shipmail.org (h-205-35.A357.priv.bahnhof.se [155.4.205.35]) (Authenticated sender: mb878879) by ste-pvt-msa1.bahnhof.se (Postfix) with ESMTPA id CFEAD3F382; Sun, 18 Aug 2019 21:46:50 +0200 (CEST) Received: from localhost.localdomain (h-205-35.A357.priv.bahnhof.se [155.4.205.35]) by mail1.shipmail.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 144693600A4; Sun, 18 Aug 2019 21:46:50 +0200 (CEST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=shipmail.org; s=mail; t=1566157610; bh=O23fLuRKZE2WM5z0E5EtZeLc2A4eFRDzz0RW+Kv8zXQ=; h=Subject:To:Cc:References:From:Date:In-Reply-To:From; b=AOwH3yEKgWjMZe1BssHhukNN4WQBQ2BQqGCZX58JmzGFwgCidQqrKARYbgrM9sivE MQoaYt5YHkyLcP+naZvrxI7lau+2NfMXI3ki1IBvtI1qDon8gObTRInspCg63FCYgk OhcE9+8rOlk6CPU2khLIOa7tyR557A8jUNfRoJu0= Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/4] x86/vmware: Update platform detection code for VMCALL/VMMCALL hypercalls To: Thomas Gleixner Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, pv-drivers@vmware.com, Thomas Hellstrom , Ingo Molnar , Borislav Petkov , "H. Peter Anvin" , x86@kernel.org, Doug Covelli References: <20190818143316.4906-1-thomas_os@shipmail.org> <20190818143316.4906-2-thomas_os@shipmail.org> From: =?UTF-8?Q?Thomas_Hellstr=c3=b6m_=28VMware=29?= Organization: VMware Inc. Message-ID: Date: Sun, 18 Aug 2019 21:46:49 +0200 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.6.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-15; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Content-Language: en-US Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 8/18/19 9:20 PM, Thomas Gleixner wrote: > On Sun, 18 Aug 2019, Thomas Hellström (VMware) wrote: > >> From: Thomas Hellstrom >> >> Vmware has historically used an "inl" instruction for this, but recent >> hardware versions support using VMCALL/VMMCALL instead, so use this method >> if supported at platform detection time. We explicitly need to code >> separate macro versions since the alternatives self-patching has not >> been performed at platform detection time. >> >> We also put tighter constraints on the assembly input parameters and update >> the SPDX license info. > Can you please split the license stuff into a separate patch? You know, one > patch one thing. It's documented for a reason. > > While at it could you please ask your legal folks whether that custom > license boilerplate can go away as well? Sure, I'll drop that from the series for now. Thanks, /Thomas