On 05/11/18 19:44, Sean Christopherson wrote:
> Although well-intentioned, keeping the KF() definition as a hint for
> handling scattered CPUID features may be counter-productive. Simply
> redefining the bit position only works for directly manipulating the
> guest's CPUID leafs, e.g. it doesn't make guest_cpuid_has() magically
> work. Taking an alternative approach, e.g. ensuring the bit position
> is identical between the Linux-defined and hardware-defined features,
> may be a simpler and/or more effective method of exposing scattered
> features to the guest.
>
> Signed-off-by: Sean Christopherson <sean.j.christopherson@xxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> arch/x86/kvm/cpuid.c | 3 ---
> 1 file changed, 3 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/cpuid.c b/arch/x86/kvm/cpuid.c
> index 7bcfa61375c0..fb2feaf78daf 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/kvm/cpuid.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/kvm/cpuid.c
> @@ -67,9 +67,6 @@ u64 kvm_supported_xcr0(void)
>
> #define F(x) bit(X86_FEATURE_##x)
>
> -/* For scattered features from cpufeatures.h; we currently expose none */
> -#define KF(x) bit(KVM_CPUID_BIT_##x)
> -
> int kvm_update_cpuid(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
> {
> struct kvm_cpuid_entry2 *best;
>
Queued, thanks.
Paolo
