On Monday 27 July 2009 03:16:27 H. Peter Anvin wrote: > Jan Kiszka wrote: > > Avi Kivity wrote: > >> On 07/24/2009 12:41 PM, Jan Kiszka wrote: > >>> I vaguely recall that someone promised to add a feature reporting > >>> facility for all those nice things, modern VM-extensions may or may not > >>> support (something like or even an extension of /proc/cpuinfo). What is > >>> the state of this plan? Would be specifically interesting for Intel > >>> CPUs as there seem to be many of them out there with restrictions for > >>> special use cases - like real-time. > >> > >> Newer kernels do report some vmx features (like flexpriority) in > >> /proc/cpuinfo but not all. > > > > Ah, nice. Then we just need this? > > Fine with me. > > Acked-by: H. Peter Anvin <hpa@xxxxxxxxx> > > However, I guess the real question if we shouldn't export ALL VMX > features in a consistent way instead? > When I add feature reporting to cpuinfo, I just put highlight features there, otherwise the VMX feature list would at least as long as CPU one. I have also suggested another field for virtualization feature for it, but some concern again userspace tools raised. For we got indeed quite a lot features, and would get more, would it better to export the part of struct vmcs_config entries(that's pin_based_exec_ctrl, cpu_based_exec_ctrl, and cpu_based_2nd_exec_ctrl) through sys/module/kvm_intel/? Put every feature to cpuinfo seems not that necessary for such a big list. -- regards Yang, Sheng -- 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
