Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1763612AbZCYRjL (ORCPT ); Wed, 25 Mar 2009 13:39:11 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1759889AbZCYRix (ORCPT ); Wed, 25 Mar 2009 13:38:53 -0400 Received: from hera.kernel.org ([140.211.167.34]:54469 "EHLO hera.kernel.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753961AbZCYRiv (ORCPT ); Wed, 25 Mar 2009 13:38:51 -0400 Subject: Re: [PATCH -tip] x86: move vmware to hypervisor From: Jaswinder Singh Rajput To: akataria@vmware.com Cc: Ingo Molnar , "H. Peter Anvin" , x86 maintainers , LKML In-Reply-To: <1238001853.32497.22.camel@alok-dev1> References: <1237281581.7907.2.camel@ht.satnam> <20090317093919.GD6477@elte.hu> <1237283318.7907.9.camel@ht.satnam> <49BFC6CB.9070603@zytor.com> <1237958994.5556.5.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20090325125955.GB516@elte.hu> <1237999971.32497.12.camel@alok-dev1> <1238000840.2500.49.camel@ht.satnam> <1238001853.32497.22.camel@alok-dev1> Content-Type: text/plain Date: Wed, 25 Mar 2009 23:08:13 +0530 Message-Id: <1238002693.2500.52.camel@ht.satnam> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.24.5 (2.24.5-1.fc10) Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1777 Lines: 42 On Wed, 2009-03-25 at 10:24 -0700, Alok Kataria wrote: > On Wed, 2009-03-25 at 10:07 -0700, Jaswinder Singh Rajput wrote: > > On Wed, 2009-03-25 at 09:52 -0700, Alok Kataria wrote: > > > > > > > > vmware can be considered a CPU here, so i think making the disabling > > > > also depend on PROCESSOR_SELECT. > > > > > > Ingo, this code is not just to be used by VMware, the reason we did this > > > generically was so that a guest could run unaltered on *any* fully > > > virtualized hypervisor. > > > And give that this code is just a boot setup thing, the only thing this > > > patch saves over here is not running the detection code on native > > > systems. All the rest of the code is guarded by the > > > "boot_cpu_data.x86_hyper_vendor" checks anyways. > > > > > > I don't really see the point of adding one more config option just for > > > this. > > > > > > > Can you please explain what is the point of adding this support all the > > time if this is useless for 99.9% of cases. IMHO, it should be optional. > > First of all, I don't know how did you get to the 99.9% number, though I > think its not a point worth debating, just like to share some info with > you. More and more people are adopting virtualization now a days and > give the trend i don't see just 0.1% people running Linux on virtualized > hardware. So though its not a common case there is still a large user > base. I am agree with you there is no point for debate. If someone need this option, she can enable it and use it. Thanks, -- JSR -- 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/