[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20160315163326.GH4559@pd.tnic>
Date: Tue, 15 Mar 2016 17:33:26 +0100
From: Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
To: Toshi Kani <toshi.kani@....com>
Cc: "Luis R. Rodriguez" <mcgrof@...nel.org>,
"mingo@...nel.org" <mingo@...nel.org>,
"hpa@...or.com" <hpa@...or.com>,
"tglx@...utronix.de" <tglx@...utronix.de>,
"jgross@...e.com" <jgross@...e.com>,
"paul.gortmaker@...driver.com" <paul.gortmaker@...driver.com>,
"x86@...nel.org" <x86@...nel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"xen-devel@...ts.xenproject.org" <xen-devel@...ts.xenproject.org>,
"boris.ostrovsky@...cle.com" <boris.ostrovsky@...cle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] x86/mm/pat: Change pat_disable() to emulate PAT table
On Tue, Mar 15, 2016 at 11:11:23AM -0600, Toshi Kani wrote:
> While cpu_has_pat is the same as boot_cpu_has(X86_FEATURE_PAT), cpu_has_XXX
> should not be used. So, this code needs to be changed to use
> boot_cpu_has(X86_FEATURE_PAT) directly.
>
> Is this right?
Yes.
--
Regards/Gruss,
Boris.
ECO tip #101: Trim your mails when you reply.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists