Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1758263AbYF0DbV (ORCPT ); Thu, 26 Jun 2008 23:31:21 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1753836AbYF0DbN (ORCPT ); Thu, 26 Jun 2008 23:31:13 -0400 Received: from mga09.intel.com ([134.134.136.24]:56612 "EHLO mga09.intel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753360AbYF0DbM (ORCPT ); Thu, 26 Jun 2008 23:31:12 -0400 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.27,713,1204531200"; d="scan'208";a="300092140" From: "Yang, Sheng" Organization: Intel To: Jeremy Fitzhardinge Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] x86: Add "virt flag" in /proc/cpuinfo Date: Fri, 27 Jun 2008 11:31:38 +0800 User-Agent: KMail/1.9.6 (enterprise 0.20070907.709405) Cc: kvm@vger.kernel.org, LKML References: <200806241708.49462.sheng.yang@intel.com> <48645DD7.5090503@goop.org> In-Reply-To: <48645DD7.5090503@goop.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-15" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200806271131.38540.sheng.yang@intel.com> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1463 Lines: 38 On Friday 27 June 2008 11:26:15 Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote: > Yang, Sheng wrote: > > From 54b1bb9fe5d2fe40fc047b43dd4e1a480d41a977 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 > > 2001 From: Sheng Yang > > Date: Tue, 24 Jun 2008 17:03:17 +0800 > > Subject: [PATCH] x86: Add "virt flag" in /proc/cpuinfo > > > > The hardware virtualization technology evolves very fast. But > > currently it's hard to tell if your CPU support a certain kind of > > HW technology without dig into the source code. > > > > The patch add a new item under /proc/cpuinfo, named "virt flag". > > The "virt flag" got the similar function as "flag". It is used to > > indicate what features does this CPU supported. It don't cover > > all features but only the important ones. > > A cpu feature is a cpu feature. I'd prefer to see all this in > "flags:". > > J But I think (as I said before) 1. The standard flag covered upper level of cpu capability, they are covered by CPUID. And virt flag was enabled by vmx/svm (we can leave it blank also), and covered by MSR. It's very different. 2. If we add virtual feature to standard flag, I am afraid it would grow too fast, though we just add some key feature to it. -- Thanks Yang, Sheng -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/