On 02.03.2022 23:11, Andrew Cooper wrote:
> This makes it behave slightly more like a regular boolean option.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Andrew Cooper <[email protected]>

Reviewed-by: Jan Beulich <[email protected]>

> Slightly RFC, because there is no easy way of making the opposite "normal
> boolean" case work for no-vpmu.

There's nothing to do to make this work afaict: Generic command line
handling converts "no-<option>" to "<option>=no" for custom params.

Jan


Reply via email to