I would like to see this in 3.15.
-hpa
On April 13, 2014 2:57:38 PM PDT, Marcelo Tosatti <mtosa...@redhat.com> wrote:
>On Fri, Apr 11, 2014 at 08:16:28PM -0400, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
>> Il 10/04/2014 16:01, Marcelo Tosatti ha scritto:
>> >On Tue, Apr 08, 2014 at 04:38:08PM -0400, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
>> >>Il 07/04/2014 21:06, Wu, Feng ha scritto:
>> >>>>>Even though the tests do not cover the CPL=3/implicit access
>case, the
>> >>>>>logic to compute PFERR_RSVD_MASK dynamically is already covered
>by AC=1.
>> >>>>> So I'm quite happy with the coverage. Series is
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>Reviewed-by: Paolo Bonzini <pbonz...@redhat.com>]
>> >>>Thanks very much for your review on this.
>> >>>BTW: Since 3.15 merge window is still open, I am wondering whether
>there is
>> >>>any possibility to make SMAP into 3.15 with another pull request.
>> >>>
>> >>
>> >>This is up to Marcelo who is currently managing the KVM tree.
>> >>
>> >>Paolo
>> >
>> >The merge window is for patches which have been tested in queue/next
>> >for sometime. This patch has received no testing other than the
>> >developer testing.
>>
>> This is not going to change unfortunately since this is not shipping
>> in any real silicon. The only hope could be to use QEMU's SVM and
>> SMAP emulation.
>
>Well, let me know if you want an exception to the rule so i should
>merge this patchset and submit it for 3.15.
>
>>
>> >Lack of implicit supervisor mode by instructions such as "Examples
>of
>> >such implicit..." in section 9.3.2, in KVM's emulator, makes the
>feature
>> >incomplete, does it not ?
>>
>> Implicit supervisor mode is handled by KVM emulator using
>> read/write_std. These accesses do not set PFERR_USER_MASK, and
>> should work fine with SMAP. Am I misunderstanding?
>>
>> Paolo
>
>Right.
--
Sent from my mobile phone. Please pardon brevity and lack of formatting.
--
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
