Li, Xin B
2007-Aug-09 10:14 UTC
[Xen-devel] [PATCH] No need to readjust cpu based control when vTPR is not available.
No need to readjust cpu based control when vTPR is not available. Signed-off-by: Xin Li <xin.b.li@intel.com> _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xensource.com http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
Keir Fraser
2007-Aug-09 10:20 UTC
Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] No need to readjust cpu based control when vTPR is not available.
It''s nice to be consistent about laundering all control flags through adjust_vmx_controls(). -- Keir On 9/8/07 11:14, "Li, Xin B" <xin.b.li@intel.com> wrote:> No need to readjust cpu based control when vTPR is not available. > Signed-off-by: Xin Li <xin.b.li@intel.com> > _______________________________________________ > Xen-devel mailing list > Xen-devel@lists.xensource.com > http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel_______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xensource.com http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
Li, Xin B
2007-Aug-09 12:20 UTC
RE: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] No need to readjust cpu based control when vTPR is not available.
Then we need this, right? -Xin>-----Original Message----- >From: Keir Fraser [mailto:keir@xensource.com] >Sent: Thursday, August 09, 2007 6:21 PM >To: Li, Xin B; xen-devel@lists.xensource.com >Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] No need to readjust cpu based >control when vTPR is not available. > >It''s nice to be consistent about laundering all control flags through >adjust_vmx_controls(). > > -- Keir > > >On 9/8/07 11:14, "Li, Xin B" <xin.b.li@intel.com> wrote: > >> No need to readjust cpu based control when vTPR is not available. >> Signed-off-by: Xin Li <xin.b.li@intel.com> >> _______________________________________________ >> Xen-devel mailing list >> Xen-devel@lists.xensource.com >> http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel >_______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xensource.com http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
Keir Fraser
2007-Aug-09 12:35 UTC
Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] No need to readjust cpu based control when vTPR is not available.
Now that bit is known to be set-to-enable, we know there will no processor that does not support TPR-shadow that requires that bit forced high. So unconditionally *clearing* that feature is fine. -- Keir On 9/8/07 13:20, "Li, Xin B" <xin.b.li@intel.com> wrote:> Then we need this, right? > > -Xin > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Keir Fraser [mailto:keir@xensource.com] >> Sent: Thursday, August 09, 2007 6:21 PM >> To: Li, Xin B; xen-devel@lists.xensource.com >> Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] No need to readjust cpu based >> control when vTPR is not available. >> >> It''s nice to be consistent about laundering all control flags through >> adjust_vmx_controls(). >> >> -- Keir >> >> >> On 9/8/07 11:14, "Li, Xin B" <xin.b.li@intel.com> wrote: >> >>> No need to readjust cpu based control when vTPR is not available. >>> Signed-off-by: Xin Li <xin.b.li@intel.com> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Xen-devel mailing list >>> Xen-devel@lists.xensource.com >>> http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel >> > _______________________________________________ > Xen-devel mailing list > Xen-devel@lists.xensource.com > http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel_______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xensource.com http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel