[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v2 1/5] i386: Add support for IA32_PRED_CMD and
From: |
Robert Hoo |
Subject: |
Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v2 1/5] i386: Add support for IA32_PRED_CMD and IA32_ARCH_CAPABILITIES MSRs |
Date: |
Wed, 04 Jul 2018 14:33:42 +0800 |
On Tue, 2018-07-03 at 15:38 +0200, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> On 03/07/2018 13:07, Robert Hoo wrote:
> >> FEAT_XSAVE_COMP_LO, /* CPUID[EAX=0xd,ECX=0].EAX */
> >> FEAT_XSAVE_COMP_HI, /* CPUID[EAX=0xd,ECX=0].EDX */
> >> + FEATURE_WORDS_NUM_CPUID,
> >> + FEATURE_WORDS_FIRST_MSR = FEATURE_WORDS_NUM_CPUID,
> >> + FEAT_MSR_ARCH_CAPABILITIES = FEATURE_WORDS_FIRST_MSR,
> >> FEATURE_WORDS,
> >> };
> >>
> >> #define FEATURE_WORDS_NUM_MSRS (FEATURE_WORDS - \
> >> FEATURE_WORDS_FIRST_MSR)
> >>
> >> Then the existing loops that use FeatureWordInfo can go up to
> >> FEATURE_WORDS_NUM_CPUID.
> > Emm... Understand your point now. It is a little risky, all references
> > to FEATURE_WORDS need to be updated carefully.
> > OK, let me try to think in this way.
> > Perhaps, I'll need to define a new 'struct FeautureWordMsrInfo' to
> > describe feature words from MSR, in parallel to current FeatureWordInfo
> > (or better rename it to FeatureWordCpuidInfo).
>
> Yes, probably. The plan seems fine.
>
> > And, if I implemented ARCH_CAPABILITIES-bits features in
FeatureWord,
> > then no necessity of having it in kvm_msr_entries, right?
>
Hi Paolo, would you confirm this? I mean your previous patch "KVM: VMX:
support MSR_IA32_ARCH_CAPABILITIES as a feature MSR" is not necessary
now?
> Paolo