H. Peter Anvin wrote:
quoted text
> Ingo Molnar wrote:
>>
>> hm, i think extending the already existing flags category sounds like 
>> a better solution than the separate virtual CPU flags line in 
>> /proc/cpuinfo. We already have self-invented flag entries (such as 
>> X86_FEATURE_NOPL), and adding more for virtualization would be quite 
>> natural to do, as long as it's reasonably close to the meaning of a 
>> 'CPU feature'.
>>
>> Peter, what would be your preference?
>>
> 
> It probably makes sense to separate these out as a separate word, 
> especially if they come from the hardware in any reasonable way.  But 
> yes, adding them to the feature array makes sense.
> 

Just to clarify:

I'm suggesting adding these to the existing feature flags array, in a 
separate binary word.

	-hpa
--
unsubscribe notice
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/