[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20090317155555.GT11935@one.firstfloor.org>
Date: Tue, 17 Mar 2009 16:55:55 +0100
From: Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>
To: Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...radead.org>
Cc: Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
Jan Beulich <jbeulich@...ell.com>,
Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy.fitzhardinge@...rix.com>,
Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@...p.org>,
the arch/x86 maintainers <x86@...nel.org>,
Xen-devel <xen-devel@...ts.xensource.com>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 10/24] xen: mask XSAVE from cpuid
> well the choice fundamentally is
> 1) Have correct applications work, even though you might not always get
> all new features that the hardware could have done.. at the expense
> that someone who wants to do horrible things can
> 2) Have all latest features always there, but break correctly written
> apps/oses every 2 years.
I'm not sure there will be that much breakage. It seems more like
a theoretical danger.
>
> I'd go for option 1 any day of the week, hands down.
> Esp if the "cpu cloaking" kind of things really disable the
> instructions... but even without.
With cpu cloaking and disabling unknown instructions it would be fine
to go conservative. But that's not what is being proposed.
-Andi
--
ak@...ux.intel.com -- Speaking for myself only.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists