Hi all, On Wed, 17 Jan 2018 13:53:26 +0100 (CET) Thomas Gleixner <tglx@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Wed, 17 Jan 2018, Stephen Rothwell wrote: > > On Wed, 17 Jan 2018 13:23:17 +0100 (CET) Thomas Gleixner <tglx@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > No. Keep it and lets next time coordinate the relevant bits and pieces > > > better. I reserve that bit 20 and let Linus sort out the trivial conflict > > > when merging the stuff. > > > > I just picked that bit 20 when resolving the conflict. The original patch used > > bit 11, so the resolution could use any other sensible bit. > > 20 is fine :) So maybe this (X86_FEATURE_SEV) should be fixed up to use "( 7*32+20)" in the kvm tree? (Just a followup patch changing the value/position in the file would be fine). -- Cheers, Stephen Rothwell
