From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Jan Beulich" Subject: RE: [PATCH 4] MCA physical address check when calculate domain Date: Tue, 10 May 2011 09:32:14 +0100 Message-ID: <4DC9142E020000780004094D@vpn.id2.novell.com> References: <4DC7CCF802000078000405A1@vpn.id2.novell.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Return-path: In-Reply-To: Content-Disposition: inline List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com To: Jinsong Liu Cc: "xen-devel@lists.xensource.com" , Keir Fraser , Xin Li , Yunhong Jiang List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org >>> On 10.05.11 at 08:38, "Liu, Jinsong" wrote: > As for physical addr, the addr in MCi_ADDR reg may be linear add/ = physical=20 > 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) =3D 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. Further, the current manual also makes a distinction between "Physical Address" and "Memory Address", and additionally has a "Generic" type - all without further explanation. Jan