[PATCH v10 3/6] x86/cpu-policy: re-arrange no-VMX logic

Move the PKS check into an "else" for the corresponding "if()", such
that further adjustments (like for USER_MSR) can easily be put there as
well.

Signed-off-by: Jan Beulich <[email protected]>
---
v5: Re-base.
v4: New.

--- a/xen/arch/x86/cpu-policy.c
+++ b/xen/arch/x86/cpu-policy.c
@@ -823,19 +823,20 @@ static void __init calculate_hvm_max_pol
         if ( !cpu_has_vmx_xsaves )
             __clear_bit(X86_FEATURE_XSAVES, fs);
     }
+    else
+    {
+        /*
+         * Xen doesn't use PKS, so the guest support for it has opted to not use
+         * the VMCS load/save controls for efficiency reasons.  This depends on
+         * the exact vmentry/exit behaviour, so don't expose PKS in other
+         * situations until someone has cross-checked the behaviour for safety.
+         */
+        __clear_bit(X86_FEATURE_PKS, fs);
+    }
 
     if ( !cpu_has_vmx_msrlist )
         __clear_bit(X86_FEATURE_MSRLIST, fs);
 
-    /*
-     * Xen doesn't use PKS, so the guest support for it has opted to not use
-     * the VMCS load/save controls for efficiency reasons.  This depends on
-     * the exact vmentry/exit behaviour, so don't expose PKS in other
-     * situations until someone has cross-checked the behaviour for safety.
-     */
-    if ( !cpu_has_vmx )
-        __clear_bit(X86_FEATURE_PKS, fs);
-
     /* 
      * Make adjustments to possible (nested) virtualization features exposed
      * to the guest