On Mon, Dec 26, 2011 at 12:35, Avi Kivity <avi@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On 12/26/2011 10:42 AM, Liu, Jinsong wrote: >> > } >> > diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/x86.c b/arch/x86/kvm/x86.c >> > index df23dff..1171def 100644 >> > --- a/arch/x86/kvm/x86.c >> > +++ b/arch/x86/kvm/x86.c >> > @@ -2089,6 +2089,9 @@ int kvm_dev_ioctl_check_extension(long ext) >> > case KVM_CAP_TSC_CONTROL: >> > r = kvm_has_tsc_control; >> > break; >> > + case KVM_CAP_TSC_DEADLINE_TIMER: >> > + r = boot_cpu_has(X86_FEATURE_TSC_DEADLINE_TIMER); >> > + break; >> >> kvm tsc deadline timer is pure software emulated, not depend on host physically. > > Yeah, I want to reconsider it in the 3.3 cycle. I'm not so hot on > exposing non hardware features anymore, at least we want better > reporting to userspace. > Just as a reminder, could you please revert the problematic commit (a3e06bbe) for 3.2? -- 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
