On April 25, 2025 9:13:31 AM PDT, Arnd Bergmann <a...@arndb.de> wrote: >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
This seems overly complex to me.
