From: "Jan Beulich" <JBeulich@novell.com>
To: Jinsong Liu <jinsong.liu@intel.com>
Cc: "xen-devel@lists.xensource.com" <xen-devel@lists.xensource.com>,
Keir Fraser <keir.xen@gmail.com>, Xin Li <xin.li@intel.com>,
Yunhong Jiang <yunhong.jiang@intel.com>
Subject: RE: [PATCH 4] MCA physical address check when calculate domain
Date: Tue, 10 May 2011 14:09:41 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4DC955350200007800040B6A@vpn.id2.novell.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <BC00F5384FCFC9499AF06F92E8B78A9E20762CE466@shsmsx502.ccr.corp.intel.com>
>>> On 10.05.11 at 12:46, "Liu, Jinsong" <jinsong.liu@intel.com> wrote:
> Jan Beulich wrote:
>>>>> On 10.05.11 at 08:38, "Liu, Jinsong" <jinsong.liu@intel.com> wrote:
>>> As for physical addr, the addr in MCi_ADDR reg may be linear add/
>>> physical 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) = 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.
>>
>
> Seems needn't care about when MCi_MISC first implemented. MCi_STATUS_MISCV
> check can make sure accessing MCi_MISC safely.
That wasn't my point. The question is whether there's a way to tell the
address format when there's no MCi_MISC implemented (or whether
all but *very* old CPUs have these registers for *all* their banks).
Jan
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-05-10 13:09 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-05-07 20:29 [PATCH 4] MCA physical address check when calculate domain Liu, Jinsong
2011-05-09 9:16 ` Jan Beulich
2011-05-10 6:38 ` Liu, Jinsong
2011-05-10 8:32 ` Jan Beulich
2011-05-10 10:46 ` Liu, Jinsong
2011-05-10 13:09 ` Jan Beulich [this message]
2011-05-11 7:21 ` Liu, Jinsong
2011-05-11 18:11 ` Luck, Tony
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=4DC955350200007800040B6A@vpn.id2.novell.com \
--to=jbeulich@novell.com \
--cc=jinsong.liu@intel.com \
--cc=keir.xen@gmail.com \
--cc=xen-devel@lists.xensource.com \
--cc=xin.li@intel.com \
--cc=yunhong.jiang@intel.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).