From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@citrix.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCHv2 for-4.6] p2m/ept: Work around hardware
 errata setting A bit
Date: Mon, 28 Sep 2015 15:48:24 +0100
Message-ID: <56095338.9040504@citrix.com>
References: <1443443974-17109-1-git-send-email-ross.lagerwall@citrix.com>
	<20150928124337.GA68200@deinos.phlegethon.org>
	<560964B402000078000A6367@prv-mh.provo.novell.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Return-path: <xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org>
In-Reply-To: <560964B402000078000A6367@prv-mh.provo.novell.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.xen.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/xen-devel>,
	<mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xen.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Post: <mailto:xen-devel@lists.xen.org>
List-Help: <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xen.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.xen.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>,
	<mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xen.org?subject=subscribe>
Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org
Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org
To: Jan Beulich <JBeulich@suse.com>, Ross Lagerwall <ross.lagerwall@citrix.com>, Tim Deegan <tim@xen.org>
Cc: Kevin Tian <kevin.tian@intel.com>, Wei Liu <wei.liu2@citrix.com>, George Dunlap <george.dunlap@eu.citrix.com>, Eddie Dong <eddie.dong@intel.com>, xen-devel@lists.xen.org, Jun Nakajima <jun.nakajima@intel.com>, Keir Fraser <keir@xen.org>
List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org

On 28/09/15 15:03, Jan Beulich wrote:
>>>> On 28.09.15 at 14:43, <tim@xen.org> wrote:
>> At 13:39 +0100 on 28 Sep (1443447574), Ross Lagerwall wrote:
>>> @@ -1150,6 +1152,9 @@ int ept_p2m_init(struct p2m_domain *p2m)
>>>      p2m->memory_type_changed = ept_memory_type_changed;
>>>      p2m->audit_p2m = NULL;
>>>  
>>> +    /* Work around Errata AVR41 on Avaton processors. */
>>> +    cpu_has_ept_ad = boot_cpu_data.x86_model != 0x4d;
>>> +
>> Shouldn't this check the family (a.k.a. boot_cpu_data.x86) too?
> Definitely. Considering that the spec update says that the firmware
> may contain a workaround (microcode update) perhaps even the
> stepping and microcode level would need looking at.

There are no details available as to what firmware fix might be
available, nor how to determine whether the issue is fixed.

~Andrew