From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Gleb Natapov <gleb@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] KVM: Implement support for the RH bit
Date: Thu, 1 Sep 2011 23:19:00 +0300
Message-ID: <20110901201900.GD26451@redhat.com>
References: <1314893135-3839-1-git-send-email-levinsasha928@gmail.com>
 <20110901174528.GA26451@redhat.com>
 <1314903592.3992.9.camel@lappy>
 <20110901193152.GB26451@redhat.com>
 <1314907111.3992.14.camel@lappy>
 <20110901200303.GC26451@redhat.com>
 <1314907500.3992.15.camel@lappy>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Cc: kvm@vger.kernel.org, Avi Kivity <avi@redhat.com>,
	Marcelo Tosatti <mtosatti@redhat.com>
To: Sasha Levin <levinsasha928@gmail.com>
Return-path: <kvm-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:8992 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com"
	rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP
	id S1751703Ab1IAUTZ (ORCPT <rfc822;kvm@vger.kernel.org>);
	Thu, 1 Sep 2011 16:19:25 -0400
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <1314907500.3992.15.camel@lappy>
Sender: kvm-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <kvm.vger.kernel.org>

On Thu, Sep 01, 2011 at 11:05:00PM +0300, Sasha Levin wrote:
> On Thu, 2011-09-01 at 23:03 +0300, Gleb Natapov wrote:
> > On Thu, Sep 01, 2011 at 10:58:31PM +0300, Sasha Levin wrote:
> > > By "actual addressing model" I meant checking the ICR of of each APIC to
> > > see if we should address it logically or physically.
> > > 
> > This is definitely not what ICR of each APIC is about.
> 
> Thats what I understood from section 10.6.2 in the spec.
> 
Section 10.6.2 talks about ACPI messages generated by a CPU (IPIs) not
about addressing mode of the CPU itself (which is, again, per message).
 
--
			Gleb.