On Friday 29 January 2010 15:36:59 Gui Jianfeng wrote:
> flexpriority_enabled implies cpu_has_vmx_virtualize_apic_accesses()
> returning true, so we don't need this check here.
>
Looks fine to me.
--
regards
Yang, Sheng
> Signed-off-by: Gui Jianfeng <guijianf...@cn.fujitsu.com>
> ---
> arch/x86/kvm/vmx.c | 4 +---
> 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/vmx.c b/arch/x86/kvm/vmx.c
> index 9f56110..0e6af4a 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/kvm/vmx.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/kvm/vmx.c
> @@ -358,9 +358,7 @@ static inline int cpu_has_vmx_ple(void)
>
> static inline int vm_need_virtualize_apic_accesses(struct kvm *kvm)
> {
> - return flexpriority_enabled &&
> - (cpu_has_vmx_virtualize_apic_accesses()) &&
> - (irqchip_in_kernel(kvm));
> + return flexpriority_enabled && irqchip_in_kernel(kvm);
> }
>
> static inline int cpu_has_vmx_vpid(void)
>
--
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
