From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1758091AbZDKMYz (ORCPT ); Sat, 11 Apr 2009 08:24:55 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1754159AbZDKMYp (ORCPT ); Sat, 11 Apr 2009 08:24:45 -0400 Received: from mx2.redhat.com ([66.187.237.31]:54715 "EHLO mx2.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752899AbZDKMYo (ORCPT ); Sat, 11 Apr 2009 08:24:44 -0400 Message-ID: <49E08C2F.4010003@redhat.com> Date: Sat, 11 Apr 2009 15:25:19 +0300 From: Avi Kivity User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.21 (X11/20090320) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Andi Kleen CC: Huang Ying , "kvm@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" Subject: Re: [PATCH] Add MCE support to KVM References: <1239155601.6384.3.camel@yhuang-dev.sh.intel.com> <49DE195D.1020303@redhat.com> <1239332455.6384.108.camel@yhuang-dev.sh.intel.com> <49E08762.1010206@redhat.com> <20090411121911.GR14687@one.firstfloor.org> In-Reply-To: <20090411121911.GR14687@one.firstfloor.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Andi Kleen wrote: >> Right, but we can allocate the maximum number, no? it's a fairly small >> amount of memory. >> > > There are 255 banks worst case which need upto 4 (in theory 5) MSRs each > > That's 8KB, which would normally not be allocated. But I think we can live with it. Do we actually need to support 255 banks? Or can we support a smaller number transparently? (IOW: are the banks interchangable?) -- I have a truly marvellous patch that fixes the bug which this signature is too narrow to contain.