On Fri, Apr 25, 2025, at 17:34, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> On April 25, 2025 7:15:15 AM PDT, Arnd Bergmann <a...@kernel.org> wrote:
>
> I really don't like testing an unrelated feature (CMOV for PAE);
How about a new symbol with the opposite polarity, e.g. CONFIG_CPU_586?
In that case, X86_HAVE_PAE and X86_CMOV could both depend on that
not being set.
I only picked the X86_CMOV symbol because it already exists in .config
files, but that is not the important bit here.
> furthermore, at least some old hypervisors were known to have
> broken PAE.
I'm not following. What does that have to do with my patch?
Arnd
