[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [PATCH v3 07/15] x86/alternative: support "not feature" and ALTERNATIVE_TERNARY

To: Jürgen Groß <jgross@xxxxxxxx>
From: Borislav Petkov <bp@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 19 Jan 2021 13:06:47 +0100
Cc: xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, x86@xxxxxxxxxx, linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@xxxxxxxxxx>, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@xxxxxxxxx>
Delivery-date: Tue, 19 Jan 2021 12:07:07 +0000
List-id: Xen developer discussion <xen-devel.lists.xenproject.org>

On Tue, Jan 19, 2021 at 12:35:42PM +0100, Jürgen Groß wrote:
> In fact this should rather be named "X86_FEATURE_TRUE", as this is its
> semantics.
>
> And I think I can define it to the value 0xffff instead of using a
> "real" bit for it.

A real bit is cheap - a special value to pay attention to in the future
not so much. Also we do have X86_FEATURE_ALWAYS already which has a
similar purpose...

-- 
Regards/Gruss,
    Boris.

https://people.kernel.org/tglx/notes-about-netiquette

Follow-Ups:
- Re: [PATCH v3 07/15] x86/alternative: support "not feature" and ALTERNATIVE_TERNARY
  - From: Jürgen Groß

References:
- Re: [PATCH v3 07/15] x86/alternative: support "not feature" and ALTERNATIVE_TERNARY
  - From: Borislav Petkov
- Re: [PATCH v3 07/15] x86/alternative: support "not feature" and ALTERNATIVE_TERNARY
  - From: Jürgen Groß

Prev by Date: Re: [PATCH] x86/CPUID: unconditionally set XEN_HVM_CPUID_IOMMU_MAPPINGS
Next by Date: Re: [PATCH v3 07/15] x86/alternative: support "not feature" and ALTERNATIVE_TERNARY
Previous by thread: Re: [PATCH v3 07/15] x86/alternative: support "not feature" and ALTERNATIVE_TERNARY
Next by thread: Re: [PATCH v3 07/15] x86/alternative: support "not feature" and ALTERNATIVE_TERNARY
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread

Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our
servers 24x7x365 and backed by RackSpace's Fanatical Support®.