[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <201101061805.27674.sheng@linux.intel.com>
Date: Thu, 6 Jan 2011 18:05:27 +0800
From: Sheng Yang <sheng@...ux.intel.com>
To: Ian Campbell <ijc@...lion.org.uk>
Cc: Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@...p.org>,
Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@...cle.com>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2 v2] xen: HVM X2APIC support
On Thursday 06 January 2011 17:35:57 Ian Campbell wrote:
> On Thu, 2011-01-06 at 17:23 +0800, Sheng Yang wrote:
> > Thanks for the comments, but seems it's a little late. The patches have
> > been there for more than a month since the first version, and now they
> > are finally in the tree... And since it's not a bug, could we leave it
> > to the later clean up?
>
> Sure. Are you going to do that?
OK, I would do it later.
--
regards
Yang, Sheng
>
> > > > > Also, checking for the XenVMMXenVMM signature alone seems like a
> > > > > very broad test for checking the availability of a specific
> > > > > feature, is there nothing more specific which we could/should be
> > > > > testing?
> > > >
> > > > The CPU flag x2apic is checked when we want to enable x2apic, and
> > > > only Xen which supported x2apic emulation would show this flag.
> > >
> > > A comment to that effect, in the checkin commentary if not the code,
> > > would be a useful reminder of this.
> >
> > The caller of the function indicate so, it's in the x2apic enabling
> > code(which is the same as KVM). So I think that maybe enough.
>
> It's not obvious to the likes of me but if it makes sense to people who
> know x2apic (but not necessarily Xen or KVM) then I guess it's ok.
>
> Ian.
--
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