From: Eduardo Habkost <ehabkost@redhat.com>
To: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
Cc: Babu Moger <babu.moger@amd.com>,
Richard Henderson <richard.henderson@linaro.org>,
qemu-devel <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>,
Igor Mammedov <imammedo@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] i386: Add missing "vmx-ept-wb" feature name
Date: Mon, 1 Feb 2021 19:18:14 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20210202001814.GK3872207@habkost.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CABgObfYrOG1QBHskP4=Rwcp2uwOZKDCE9_RF1mmJWngD90zSjA@mail.gmail.com>
On Tue, Feb 02, 2021 at 12:28:38AM +0100, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> Il mar 2 feb 2021, 00:05 Eduardo Habkost <ehabkost@redhat.com> ha scritto:
>
> > On Mon, Feb 01, 2021 at 11:59:48PM +0100, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> > > Il lun 1 feb 2021, 23:54 Eduardo Habkost <ehabkost@redhat.com> ha
> > scritto:
> > >
> > > > Not having a feature name in feature_word_info breaks error
> > > > reporting and query-cpu-model-expansion. Add the missing feature
> > > > name to feature_word_info[FEAT_VMX_EPT_VPID_CAPS].feat_names[14].
> > > >
> > > This is intentional, because there's no way that any hypervisor can run
> > if
> > > this feature is disabled.
> >
> > If leaving the feature without name enables some desirable
> > behavior, that's by accident and not by design. Which part of
> > the existing behavior is intentional?
> >
>
> Not being able to disable it.
We can make it a hard dependency of vmx, then. We shouldn't
leave it without a name, though.
--
Eduardo
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-02-02 0:19 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-02-01 22:54 [PATCH 0/3] i386: Ensure feature names are always defined Eduardo Habkost
2021-02-01 22:54 ` [PATCH 1/3] i386: Add missing "vmx-ept-wb" feature name Eduardo Habkost
2021-02-01 22:59 ` Paolo Bonzini
2021-02-01 23:05 ` Eduardo Habkost
2021-02-01 23:28 ` Paolo Bonzini
2021-02-02 0:18 ` Eduardo Habkost [this message]
2021-02-02 7:54 ` Paolo Bonzini
2021-02-02 15:25 ` Eduardo Habkost
2021-02-01 22:54 ` [PATCH 2/3] i386: Move asserts to separate x86_cpudef_validate() function Eduardo Habkost
2021-02-02 16:02 ` Philippe Mathieu-Daudé
2021-02-01 22:54 ` [PATCH 3/3] i386: Sanity check CPU model feature sets Eduardo Habkost
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=20210202001814.GK3872207@habkost.net \
--to=ehabkost@redhat.com \
--cc=babu.moger@amd.com \
--cc=imammedo@redhat.com \
--cc=pbonzini@redhat.com \
--cc=qemu-devel@nongnu.org \
--cc=richard.henderson@linaro.org \
/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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).