From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mgamail.intel.com (mgamail.intel.com [192.198.163.16]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2CD9249BD68; Wed, 23 Sep 2026 11:04:23 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=192.198.163.16 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1790161468; cv=none; b=ayQekLCw+HRxl3CS8cgj7EQKqpmt0+/sFxZIEzyT4hn/JNaiqJq+g8o+ZkNk4xECMMy7EM+iWxwk+ZQHJzVh6awKL8M9P1XLJ9zxrQZTv2G61iNznwRylldQPmdUW2niiQEfl9ueVWBNZJ9Ulg35LgCoj9JPb1U+iG9FmTBMIzs= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1790161468; c=relaxed/simple; bh=zGjMIFygYqqz687r0Dm5FHB9zulLKHdqaxokHtzat/0=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=qXOY38cotmwqreY0w8/ghmdwjKVwJfzI2+/URhOBBw94+Ee1Efl0meNGU28s5+SbkmKaDSgnXuMXKk+O1v7j+iSijJiDTjASzz5bKj123uUOMqqlJhkm0xUY3RzlZ/YcPUQxUwWxsc+tnybTAMM/P5uuFSKXHMEe2DxWBd4qm/U= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=intel.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=intel.com; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=intel.com header.i=@intel.com header.b=ghzlVDic; arc=none smtp.client-ip=192.198.163.16 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=intel.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=intel.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=intel.com header.i=@intel.com header.b="ghzlVDic" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=intel.com; i=@intel.com; q=dns/txt; s=Intel; t=1790161464; x=1821697464; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references: mime-version:in-reply-to; bh=zGjMIFygYqqz687r0Dm5FHB9zulLKHdqaxokHtzat/0=; b=ghzlVDic6G5jPO39akH+3R5j7n46uaFUZMM8/WHyFy94MxbB11XlZT3w HEaJAfeGfQ325/E+IdRfUPi11WSlPkNT/4dgZQvLIWTcAMmq1JPV2O8Va Ym/PUrOJ5hpEINLPEf9h9+Evh50RR9yes9rXG3/WR7TTMRHKyGaBlh39h coI5myozv8it2WniHd+uHwFtdyBahrLuCQAXY0CS6q8U6n+1x6sXtD0IL ZBukH/rNi/RX0T3TKW/w5oelQLgy7CtV3mUMq/53m+wTPNaO4hS4PA2a2 reoxTNixsyFagzXozGC254sz8uTZO9eR8Xisfup3KBP5Zjk5Vr4fru2je g==; X-CSE-ConnectionGUID: 1QONjn5VSvmIYvQjstq08w== X-CSE-MsgGUID: Rcwv5mziQMS4yBW2rSj02Q== X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6800,10657,11913"; a="78398399" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="6.27,118,1787036400"; d="scan'208";a="78398399" Received: from fmviesa003.fm.intel.com ([10.60.135.143]) by fmvoesa110.fm.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 23 Sep 2026 04:04:19 -0700 X-CSE-ConnectionGUID: TVU7IVoTRMahSqgIQUYcpQ== X-CSE-MsgGUID: IXCmbDfGQim3ZgcvijNH+w== X-ExtLoop1: 1 Received: from zhaoliu1-desk.sh.intel.com (HELO localhost) ([10.238.208.118]) by fmviesa003.fm.intel.com with ESMTP; 23 Sep 2026 04:04:17 -0700 Date: Wed, 23 Sep 2026 19:04:16 +0800 From: Zhao Liu To: "Chang S. Bae" Cc: pbonzini@redhat.com, seanjc@google.com, kvm@vger.kernel.org, x86@kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Zhao Liu Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 00/20] KVM: x86: Enable APX for guests Message-ID: References: <20260902021804.718676-1-chang.seok.bae@intel.com> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20260902021804.718676-1-chang.seok.bae@intel.com> On Wed, Sep 02, 2026 at 02:17:44AM +0000, Chang S. Bae wrote: > Date: Wed, 2 Sep 2026 02:17:44 +0000 > From: "Chang S. Bae" > Subject: [PATCH v7 00/20] KVM: x86: Enable APX for guests > X-Mailer: git-send-email 2.53.0 > > Dear KVM maintainers, > > This respin is primarily a rebase onto v7.3, with the following minor > changes: > > * Patch 8: Adjust the core API usage from static_cpu_has() to > cpu_feature_enabled(). > * Patch 2: Fix an unintended code comment change that was previously > leaked to next patch. > > Please let me know if there are any remaining issues that should be > addressed. I'm trying to figure out the next steps for the series. > > Otherwise, I would appreciate your consideration for picking up this. Hi Chang, I tested this series with QEMU master, and no regression was found. my tests include: 1) Check APX enumeration & XSTATE in L1 & L2 VM. 2) (with AI help) Collect instruction test cases from LLVM/GCC and create some new, then test them in L1 & L2 VM. 3) Expand the selftest to cover additional KVM instruction-emulator cases. All tests are passed at my side, so, Tested-by: Zhao Liu