[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <d7a86076-d1e8-418f-a167-e2d16b2dd7f7@intel.com>
Date: Mon, 26 Aug 2024 14:47:40 -0700
From: Sohil Mehta <sohil.mehta@...el.com>
To: Sean Christopherson <seanjc@...gle.com>
CC: <x86@...nel.org>, Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>, Dave Hansen
<dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>, "Ingo
Molnar" <mingo@...hat.com>, "H . Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, Uros Bizjak
<ubizjak@...il.com>, Sandipan Das <sandipan.das@....com>, Peter Zijlstra
<peterz@...radead.org>, Vegard Nossum <vegard.nossum@...cle.com>, Tony Luck
<tony.luck@...el.com>, Pawan Gupta <pawan.kumar.gupta@...ux.intel.com>,
Nikolay Borisov <nik.borisov@...e.com>, Eric Biggers <ebiggers@...gle.com>,
Xin Li <xin3.li@...el.com>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] x86/cpufeature: Add feature dependency checks
On 8/26/2024 1:05 PM, Sean Christopherson wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 23, 2024, Sohil Mehta wrote:
>> But I still feel that for the rare case when something like this seeps
>> through it would be better to disable the feature upfront than run in a
>> kernel panic or some other unexpected behavior.
>
> Agreed.
>
Great, I'll wait for a few more days to see if someone says otherwise.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists