WARNING - OLD ARCHIVES

This is an archived copy of the Xen.org mailing list, which we have preserved to ensure that existing links to archives are not broken. The live archive, which contains the latest emails, can be found at http://lists.xen.org/
   
 
 
Xen 
 
Home Products Support Community News
 
   
 

xen-devel

RE: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] X86: cpuid faulting feature enable

To: Keir Fraser <keir.xen@xxxxxxxxx>, Jan Beulich <JBeulich@xxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: RE: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] X86: cpuid faulting feature enable
From: "Liu, Jinsong" <jinsong.liu@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Sat, 2 Jul 2011 02:12:53 +0800
Accept-language: en-US
Acceptlanguage: en-US
Cc: "Tian, Kevin" <kevin.tian@xxxxxxxxx>, "xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx" <xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, "Shan, Haitao" <haitao.shan@xxxxxxxxx>, "Li, Xin" <xin.li@xxxxxxxxx>
Delivery-date: Fri, 01 Jul 2011 11:13:37 -0700
Envelope-to: www-data@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <CA33CA5B.1D5E2%keir.xen@xxxxxxxxx>
List-help: <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=help>
List-id: Xen developer discussion <xen-devel.lists.xensource.com>
List-post: <mailto:xen-devel@lists.xensource.com>
List-subscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=subscribe>
List-unsubscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=unsubscribe>
References: <BC00F5384FCFC9499AF06F92E8B78A9E22307FB535@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <CA33CA5B.1D5E2%keir.xen@xxxxxxxxx>
Sender: xen-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Thread-index: Acw4BnepSgQIBTVsRT2C3lT4l/qutAADMoxAAAF1d1cAAEQa0A==
Thread-topic: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] X86: cpuid faulting feature enable
Keir Fraser wrote:
> On 01/07/2011 18:48, "Liu, Jinsong" <jinsong.liu@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> 
>>> Down to a particular stepping? That surely doesn't make sense for
>>> anything but your own experimenting.
>> 
>> Yes, it's some ugly.
>> Currently cpuid faulting is not a architecturally commited feature,
>> and, some other Intel processors (which do not has cpuid faulting
>> feature) also has 0xceh MSR. Hence I use current way for safe.
>> However, I marked it as FIXME to update in the future accordingly.
> 
> But Intel's own supporting document states that bit 31 of the
> PLATFORM_INFO MSR should be sufficient to identify the cpuid faulting
> feature. Do you really need the stepping check as well? Could you
> just do a rdmsr_safe read-and-check of PLATFORM_INFO_MSR[31] instead?
> 
> It would be okay for other Intel CPUs to have MSR 0xce, so long as
> they don't set bit 31...
> 
>  -- Keir

That's good. It does formally state.
We can move family/model/stepping now.

Thanks,
Jinsong
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel