Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1758552AbZCPALS (ORCPT ); Sun, 15 Mar 2009 20:11:18 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1752287AbZCPALG (ORCPT ); Sun, 15 Mar 2009 20:11:06 -0400 Received: from casper.infradead.org ([85.118.1.10]:46199 "EHLO casper.infradead.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751122AbZCPALF (ORCPT ); Sun, 15 Mar 2009 20:11:05 -0400 Date: Sun, 15 Mar 2009 17:09:45 -0700 From: Arjan van de Ven To: Jeremy Fitzhardinge Cc: "H. Peter Anvin" , Jan Beulich , Xen-devel , Jeremy Fitzhardinge , the arch/x86 maintainers , Linux Kernel Mailing List Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 10/24] xen: mask XSAVE from cpuid Message-ID: <20090315170945.08344b86@infradead.org> In-Reply-To: <49BD97C6.2070401@goop.org> References: <1236931920-6861-1-git-send-email-jeremy@goop.org> <1236931920-6861-11-git-send-email-jeremy@goop.org> <49BA3A84.76E4.0078.0@novell.com> <49BA7810.6090807@goop.org> <49BD4CE1.6040100@zytor.com> <49BD6D0E.1010107@goop.org> <20090315154718.00353625@infradead.org> <49BD97C6.2070401@goop.org> Organization: Intel X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.7.0 (GTK+ 2.14.7; i386-redhat-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SRS-Rewrite: SMTP reverse-path rewritten from by casper.infradead.org See http://www.infradead.org/rpr.html Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1286 Lines: 31 On Sun, 15 Mar 2009 17:05:26 -0700 Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote: > Arjan van de Ven wrote: > > This is indicative of something that might be a huge bug in Xen: > > Xen should never ever pass through CPUID bits it does not know. > > If Xen does not honor that, there is a fundamental and eternally > > recurring problem.... every time something new gets introduced Xen > > likely breaks. > > Yes, I'd agree; Xen should whitelist cpu capabilities rather than > blacklist them. Jan expressed the opposite opinion (on the grounds > that it precludes using features which don't require special OS or > hypervisor support without Xen modifications). Well.. pretty much all new instructions need Xen modifications due to the need to be emulate to deal with traps/vmexits/etc right? So I don't quite see many cpuid bits that would NOT involve some Xen modification or another ;) -- Arjan van de Ven Intel Open Source Technology Centre For development, discussion and tips for power savings, visit http://www.lesswatts.org -- 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/