[1/1] KVM: PPC: Introduce KVM_CAP_PPC_HTM
sam.bobroff at au1.ibm.com
Tue Jul 19 13:23:25 AEST 2016
On Fri, Jul 08, 2016 at 08:49:49PM +1000, Michael Ellerman wrote:
> On Wed, 2016-06-07 at 06:05:54 UTC, Sam bobroff wrote:
> > diff --git a/arch/powerpc/kvm/powerpc.c b/arch/powerpc/kvm/powerpc.c
> > index 02416fe..06d79bc 100644
> > --- a/arch/powerpc/kvm/powerpc.c
> > +++ b/arch/powerpc/kvm/powerpc.c
> > @@ -588,6 +588,10 @@ int kvm_vm_ioctl_check_extension(struct kvm *kvm, long ext)
> > r = 1;
> > break;
> > #endif
> > + case KVM_CAP_PPC_HTM:
> > + r = cpu_has_feature(CPU_FTR_TM)
> > + && is_kvmppc_hv_enabled(kvm);
> I think it should be using CPU_FTR_TM_COMP.
Oh, why is that? I'm happy to respin the patch I'm just curious.
(I did it that way becuase that seems to be the way the other flags are used,
If I read the code correctly, using CPU_FTR_TM_COMP will work fine: it should
cause the cpu_has_feature() test to always return false if CPU_FTR_TM_COMP is
> And AFAICS you don't need to break that line.
Sure, I'll un-split it when I respin.
More information about the Linuxppc-dev