I started to pick #7 (#6 is in to have things in-sync between
SVM and VMX). Most other patches then were needed as dependencies.
The only difference here is #2 which I found being applied together
with #1 (which is a dependency). Since #2 is rather change to add
support than to fix a bug it was applied only to our 3.2 tree. But
maybe this would be the time to get it into the upstream 3.2 stable
as well. I would leave the decision to you, just that the testing I
have done, was basically with that addition. The test was just an
installation of a nested guest (so not necessarily testing RDPMC,
only the fact that with that applied to 3.2, a 3.5 is able to load
the kvm-intel module).

What I also did not do is to look much into the other direction,
like what patches may be important as that feature now would be
supported in 3.2. I think people on this list are likely in a much
better position to decide that.

So here the series I used to compile and test on top of 3.2:

0001-KVM-Move-cpuid-code-to-new-file.patch
0002-KVM-expose-latest-Intel-cpu-new-features-BMI1-BMI2-F.patch
0003-KVM-Expose-kvm_lapic_local_deliver.patch
0004-KVM-Expose-a-version-2-architectural-PMU-to-a-guests.patch
0005-KVM-Add-generic-RDPMC-support.patch
0006-KVM-SVM-Intercept-RDPMC.patch
0007-KVM-VMX-Intercept-RDPMC.patch

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kvm" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Reply via email to