Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH RFC] Add SUPPORT.md

["Jan Beulich" <JBeulich@xxxxxxxx>]

>>> On 07.09.17 at 13:31, <george.dunlap@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On 08/31/2017 01:46 PM, Jan Beulich wrote:
>>>>> On 31.08.17 at 12:27, <george.dunlap@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>> +### Live Patching
>>> +
>>> +    Status: Supported, x86 only
>>> +
>>> +Compile time disabled
>> 
>> Bu we're settled to change that, aren't we? It was even meant to be
>> so in 4.9, but then didn't make it.
> 
> Change the compile time disabling?  I don't really know. :-)

Yeah, well, that series is taking awfully long to become ready to go
in. Konrad?

> What gets checked in should ideally be true at the time it's checked in.

Agreed.

>>> +### Virtual Machine Introspection
>>> +
>>> +    Status: Supported, x86 only
>> 
>> Including security support?
> 
> Not sure, actually.  Opinions?

So far it was my understanding that this is at best preview.

>>> +### x86/Advanced Vector eXtension
>>> +
>>> +    Status: Supported
>> 
>> How fine-grained do we want this document to be? If this one is a
>> valid entry, then many other CPUID bits will need to have entries
>> too.
> 
> Well remember that this list came from the "Feature support matrix",
> which was also meant to announce / brag about new features we were
> developing.
> 
> This is already really long.  Anything that comes accessible to guests
> by default (which AVX instructions are) must be supported (including
> security support).  I wonder if there's a better way to specify this
> sort of thing.

One option may be to refer to public/arch-x86/cpufeatureset.h,
but of course that would require it to gain support annotations,
which in turn may be ugly. Short of enumerating all supported
CPUID flags here, I can't think of better alternatives.

Jan


_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.xen.org/xen-devel