On Fri, Apr 11, 2014 at 08:16:28PM -0400, Paolo Bonzini wrote: > Il 10/04/2014 16:01, Marcelo Tosatti ha scritto: > >On Tue, Apr 08, 2014 at 04:38:08PM -0400, Paolo Bonzini wrote: > >>Il 07/04/2014 21:06, Wu, Feng ha scritto: > >>>>>Even though the tests do not cover the CPL=3/implicit access case, the > >>>>>logic to compute PFERR_RSVD_MASK dynamically is already covered by AC=1. > >>>>> So I'm quite happy with the coverage. Series is > >>>>> > >>>>>Reviewed-by: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@xxxxxxxxxx>] > >>>Thanks very much for your review on this. > >>>BTW: Since 3.15 merge window is still open, I am wondering whether there is > >>>any possibility to make SMAP into 3.15 with another pull request. > >>> > >> > >>This is up to Marcelo who is currently managing the KVM tree. > >> > >>Paolo > > > >The merge window is for patches which have been tested in queue/next > >for sometime. This patch has received no testing other than the > >developer testing. > > This is not going to change unfortunately since this is not shipping > in any real silicon. The only hope could be to use QEMU's SVM and > SMAP emulation. Well, let me know if you want an exception to the rule so i should merge this patchset and submit it for 3.15. > > >Lack of implicit supervisor mode by instructions such as "Examples of > >such implicit..." in section 9.3.2, in KVM's emulator, makes the feature > >incomplete, does it not ? > > Implicit supervisor mode is handled by KVM emulator using > read/write_std. These accesses do not set PFERR_USER_MASK, and > should work fine with SMAP. Am I misunderstanding? > > Paolo Right. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kvm" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
