>>> On 05.03.18 at 12:43, <jgr...@suse.com> wrote: > On 05/03/18 12:20, Jan Beulich wrote: >>>>> On 05.03.18 at 10:50, <wei.l...@citrix.com> wrote: >>> --- a/xen/arch/x86/setup.c >>> +++ b/xen/arch/x86/setup.c >>> @@ -1701,6 +1701,13 @@ void __init noreturn __start_xen(unsigned long mbi_p) >>> cpu_has_nx ? XENLOG_INFO : XENLOG_WARNING "Warning: ", >>> cpu_has_nx ? "" : "not "); >>> >>> + >>> + printk(XENLOG_INFO >>> + "PCID (Process-Context IDentifier) %ssupported\n", >>> + cpu_has_pcid ? "" : "not "); >>> + >>> + printk(XENLOG_INFO "INVPCID %ssupported\n", cpu_has_invpcid ? "" : >>> "not "); >> >> Do we really need this? We log a message for NX as an exception, >> we don't do so for other features (and things would get pretty >> unwieldy if we did). > > I'd rather keep this message. As we are hiding PCID and INPCID from dom0 > this is the only indicator of those features being supported. In case of > an error related to TLB consistency this information is important IMO.
Well, this argument would hold for almost every other advanced feature we use. Jan _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org https://lists.xenproject.org/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel
