Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
Date:   Wed, 26 Jun 2019 15:48:28 +0200 (CEST)
From:   Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
To:     Juergen Gross <jgross@suse.com>
cc:     Zhenzhong Duan <zhenzhong.duan@oracle.com>,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, mingo@kernel.org, bp@alien8.de,
        hpa@zytor.com, boris.ostrovsky@oracle.com, sstabellini@kernel.org,
        peterz@infradead.org, srinivas.eeda@oracle.com,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>, xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 4/7] Revert "xen: Introduce 'xen_nopv' to disable PV
 extensions for HVM guests."
In-Reply-To: <c77e5df3-77ac-bce2-ccd3-7848f1915b43@suse.com>
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.21.1906261546460.32342@nanos.tec.linutronix.de>
References: <1561377779-28036-1-git-send-email-zhenzhong.duan@oracle.com> <1561377779-28036-5-git-send-email-zhenzhong.duan@oracle.com> <c77e5df3-77ac-bce2-ccd3-7848f1915b43@suse.com>
User-Agent: Alpine 2.21 (DEB 202 2017-01-01)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Wed, 26 Jun 2019, Juergen Gross wrote:
> On 24.06.19 14:02, Zhenzhong Duan wrote:
> > This reverts commit 8d693b911bb9c57009c24cb1772d205b84c7985c.
> > 
> > Instead we use an unified parameter 'nopv' for all the hypervisor
> > platforms.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Zhenzhong Duan <zhenzhong.duan@oracle.com>
> > Cc: Boris Ostrovsky <boris.ostrovsky@oracle.com>
> > Cc: Juergen Gross <jgross@suse.com>
> > Cc: Stefano Stabellini <sstabellini@kernel.org>
> > Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
> > Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>
> > Cc: Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>
> > Cc: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org
> 
> Reviewed-by: Juergen Gross <jgross@suse.com>

You're really sure that you want to break existing setups which might use
that already?

Command line parameters are ABI. You can map xen_nopv to the new shiny nopv
implementation but removing it?

Your decision, but you've been told :)

Thanks,

	tglx