[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <dfdba4e2-371c-db18-6989-541f802a0783@intel.com>
Date: Tue, 3 Oct 2023 20:27:37 -0700
From: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...el.com>
To: Jim Mattson <jmattson@...gle.com>
Cc: kvm@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Pawan Gupta <pawan.kumar.gupta@...ux.intel.com>,
Jiaxi Chen <jiaxi.chen@...ux.intel.com>,
Kim Phillips <kim.phillips@....com>,
Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>,
Sean Christopherson <seanjc@...gle.com>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, x86@...nel.org,
Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>,
Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86: KVM: Add feature flag for AMD's
FsGsKernelGsBaseNonSerializing
On 10/3/23 19:44, Jim Mattson wrote:
> I'm a little surprised at the pushback, TBH. Are you implying that
> there is some advantage to *not* passing this bit through?
I'm not really trying to push back. I'm honestly just curious. Linux
obviously doesn't cat about the bit. So is this for some future Linux
or some other OS?
Powered by blists - more mailing lists