[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] Proper use of VMX execution controls MSR.


  • To: "Li, Xin B" <xin.b.li@xxxxxxxxx>, <xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • From: Keir Fraser <keir@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Thu, 29 Mar 2007 10:11:58 +0100
  • Delivery-date: Thu, 29 Mar 2007 02:11:01 -0700
  • List-id: Xen developer discussion <xen-devel.lists.xensource.com>
  • Thread-index: AcdxUQOcmZ2ehsIdTvOT1iiVu1vOEgAEiiMSAA+9sZAADN/eOAAAdMgwAAK1/kQ=
  • Thread-topic: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] Proper use of VMX execution controls MSR.



On 29/3/07 09:37, "Li, Xin B" <xin.b.li@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> if we have the feature support in Xen, we should set the input control
> bit, and expect the adjusted value to be 1;
> if we don't have the feature support in Xen, we should clear the input
> control bit, and expect adjusted value to be 0;
> That's meaning the adjusted output is determined by the input control.
> So the expression should be "AND (msr_hi XOR msr_lo)".

The subsequent AND with msr_hi and the OR with msr_lo has exactly the same
effect. So the AND (msr_hi XOR msr_lo) is not incorrect, but it is
redundant.

 -- Keir


_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel


 


Rackspace

Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our
servers 24x7x365 and backed by RackSpace's Fanatical Support®.