On Fri, Sep 16, 2016 at 10:08:30AM +0200, Igor Mammedov wrote: > On Thu, 15 Sep 2016 11:23:47 -0300 > Eduardo Habkost <ehabk...@redhat.com> wrote: > > > On Wed, Sep 14, 2016 at 12:01:50PM +0200, Igor Mammedov wrote: > > > commit (14c985cff target-i386: present virtual L3 cache info for vcpus) > > > misplaced compat property putting it in new 2.8 machine type > > > which would effectively to disable feature until 2.9 is released. > > > Intent of commit probably should be to disable feature for 2.7 > > > and older while allowing not yet released 2.8 to have feature > > > enabled by default. > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Igor Mammedov <imamm...@redhat.com> > > > --- > > > include/hw/i386/pc.h | 9 ++++----- > > > 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-) > > > > > > diff --git a/include/hw/i386/pc.h b/include/hw/i386/pc.h > > > index d5654ab..1c5fd08 100644 > > > --- a/include/hw/i386/pc.h > > > +++ b/include/hw/i386/pc.h > > > @@ -369,17 +369,16 @@ int e820_get_num_entries(void); > > > bool e820_get_entry(int, uint32_t, uint64_t *, uint64_t *); > > > > > > #define PC_COMPAT_2_8 \ > > > + > > > +#define PC_COMPAT_2_7 \ > > > + PC_COMPAT_2_8 \ > > > > Same as patch 1/2: this doesn't seem to be necessary since commit > > bacc344c548ce165a0001276ece56ee4b0bddae3. > > "l3-cache" is off for 2.8 regardless of bacc344c while it should be off > only for 2.7 and older. > > Anyway, I'll respin because of 1/2 should be rewritten.
Yes, l3-cache on PC_COMPAT_2_7 is necessary. I was only talking about the PC_COMPAT_2_8 line above, because it looked like a newly added line (but now I see it was just the line from patch 1/2 being moved, sorry for the confusion). -- Eduardo
