On Tue, Feb 28, 2023, Borislav Petkov wrote: > On Tue, Feb 28, 2023 at 10:24:16PM +0000, Takahiro Itazuri wrote: > > I'm still a kernel newbie and I don't have a strong opinion for that. > > I just thought it would be helpful if the KVM_GET_SUPPORTED_CPUID API > > returns the same security information as the host, as long as it is > > harmless. > > Not harmless - cpufeatures.h should contain flags which the kernel uses > and not *every* CPUID bit out there. I thought that the consensus was that adding unused-by-the-kernel flags to cpufeatures.h is ok so long as the feature is hidden from /proc/cpuinfo and the kernel already dedicates a word to the CPUID leaf?
