On Mon, 15 Jan 2018, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> On Mon, 15 Jan 2018, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> > Hi all,
> > --- a/arch/x86/include/asm/cpufeatures.h
> > +++ b/arch/x86/include/asm/cpufeatures.h
> > @@@ -202,11 -201,9 +202,11 @@@
> > #define X86_FEATURE_HW_PSTATE ( 7*32+ 8) /* AMD HW-PState */
> > #define X86_FEATURE_PROC_FEEDBACK ( 7*32+ 9) /* AMD ProcFeedbackInterface
> > */
> > #define X86_FEATURE_SME ( 7*32+10) /* AMD Secure Memory
> > Encryption */
> > -#define X86_FEATURE_SEV ( 7*32+11) /* AMD Secure
> > Encrypted Virtualization */
> > -
> > +#define X86_FEATURE_PTI ( 7*32+11) /* Kernel Page Table
> > Isolation enabled */
> > +#define X86_FEATURE_RETPOLINE ( 7*32+12) /* Generic Retpoline
> > mitigation for Spectre variant 2 */
> > +#define X86_FEATURE_RETPOLINE_AMD ( 7*32+13) /* AMD Retpoline mitigation
> > for Spectre variant 2 */
> > #define X86_FEATURE_INTEL_PPIN ( 7*32+14) /* Intel Processor
> > Inventory Number */
> > - #define X86_FEATURE_INTEL_PT ( 7*32+15) /* Intel Processor
> > Trace */
>
> Where is that patch which moves INTEL_PT ?
>
> commit 632218d8dee296c8b397c13b7b3b4be090a1c043
> Author: Paolo Bonzini <pbonz...@redhat.com>
> Date: Mon Dec 11 04:30:50 2017 +0800
>
> x86: cpufeature: move processor tracing out of scattered features
>
> Processor tracing is already enumerated in word 9 (CPUID[7,0].EBX),
> so do not duplicate it in the scattered features word.
>
> Signed-off-by: Paolo Bonzini <pbonz...@redhat.com>
>
> Can KVM folks please stop doing random changes to the cpufeatures code
> without talking to x86 maintainers and Borislav?
>
> This wants to go through TIP or at least reviewed and acked.
In fact it needs to go through TIP. We spent a lot of effort to make the
backporting of all this mess simple and this is just shooting a hole in it.
Please drop that change and we sort something out how it can be done proper.
Dammit, we have a well established process for stuff like that.
Thanks,
tglx
