On 01/18/2018 12:53 PM, Cornelia Huck wrote: > On Thu, 18 Jan 2018 09:56:25 +0100 > Christian Borntraeger <borntrae...@de.ibm.com> wrote: > >> We want to provide more hw features to guests, namely the new bpb >> control as well as other transparent facilities that might be >> introduced by firmware updates (e.g. the stfle facility 81). >> >> See the kernel discussion for the KVM side >> https://www.spinics.net/lists/kernel/msg2700551.html >> >> v2->v3: - use bool for bpbc >> - sort cpu facilities >> v1->v2: - style and comment fixes >> - drop transparent facility patch >> - add patch to introduce facility 81 >> >> Christian Borntraeger (3): >> header sync >> s390x/kvm: Handle bpb feature >> s390x/kvm: provide stfle.81 >> >> linux-headers/asm-s390/kvm.h | 9 ++++----- >> linux-headers/linux/kvm.h | 5 +++-- >> target/s390x/cpu.c | 1 + >> target/s390x/cpu.h | 1 + >> target/s390x/cpu_features.c | 2 ++ >> target/s390x/cpu_features_def.h | 2 ++ >> target/s390x/gen-features.c | 2 ++ >> target/s390x/kvm.c | 14 ++++++++++++++ >> target/s390x/machine.c | 17 +++++++++++++++++ >> 9 files changed, 46 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-) >> > > Thanks, I've queued this. Once the bpb code lands in Linux, I'll > replace patch 1 with a proper header sync and push to s390-next.
Have the x86 features been marked as stable? If the answer is yes, shall we mark these patches for stable as well?
