| |
|
 |
|
 |
|
|
|
| |
|
|
xen-devel
RE: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 4] MCA physical address check when calculate dom
>>> On 10.05.11 at 12:46, "Liu, Jinsong" <jinsong.liu@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Jan Beulich wrote:
>>>>> On 10.05.11 at 08:38, "Liu, Jinsong" <jinsong.liu@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>> As for physical addr, the addr in MCi_ADDR reg may be linear add/
>>> physical add/ setment offset. according to Intel SDM, the addr in
>>> MCi_ADDR reg is physical addr only when: 1). MISCV bit of MCi_STATUS
>>> set; 2). ADDRV bit of MCi_STATUS set;
>>> 3). address mode of MCi_MISC (bit 6~8) = 010;
>>
>> I realize this is what's being documented currently. Going back to the
>> newest hard copy manual I still have (PentiumPro, which luckily is the
>> first one where the banked implementation is described), there's no
>> MCi_MISC (it's documented, but said to not be implemented on these
>> old CPUs), and the description for the address reads "The address
>> returned is either 32-bit virtual, 32-bit linear, or 36-bit
>> physical". Now I certainly don't care much about PPro anymore, but I
>> wonder when MCi_MISC was first implemented in the way your patch is
>> using it.
>>
>
> Seems needn't care about when MCi_MISC first implemented. MCi_STATUS_MISCV
> check can make sure accessing MCi_MISC safely.
That wasn't my point. The question is whether there's a way to tell the
address format when there's no MCi_MISC implemented (or whether
all but *very* old CPUs have these registers for *all* their banks).
Jan
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
|
|
|
| |
|
Home