On 10.08.2022 21:14, Andrew Cooper wrote:
> On 15/06/2022 11:32, Jan Beulich wrote:
>> --- a/xen/include/public/arch-x86/cpufeatureset.h
>> +++ b/xen/include/public/arch-x86/cpufeatureset.h
>> @@ -281,7 +281,7 @@ XEN_CPUFEATURE(TSX_FORCE_ABORT, 9*32+13)
>>  XEN_CPUFEATURE(SERIALIZE,     9*32+14) /*A  SERIALIZE insn */
>>  XEN_CPUFEATURE(TSXLDTRK,      9*32+16) /*a  TSX load tracking 
>> suspend/resume insns */
>>  XEN_CPUFEATURE(CET_IBT,       9*32+20) /*   CET - Indirect Branch Tracking 
>> */
>> -XEN_CPUFEATURE(AVX512_FP16,   9*32+23) /*   AVX512 FP16 instructions */
>> +XEN_CPUFEATURE(AVX512_FP16,   9*32+23) /*A  AVX512 FP16 instructions */
> 
> This ought to be 'a' rather than 'A' until someone's actually run the
> series on a SPR system.

Hmm, merely running the series there wouldn't mean much, as the code
doesn't usually come into play. My justification for going straight to
A was, as expressed in the description, that the new tests all pass on
SDE. Otherwise I think you're putting the bar too high for ever going
from a to A for such extensions where no new state is introduced, as
imo this would then mean proving that every single insn was actually
tested when taken through emulation.

> Otherwise, Acked-by: Andrew Cooper <[email protected]>

Thanks (also for the other ones), but I'll wait with applying this one
until we've settled on the above.

Jan

Reply via email to