Re: [PATCH 0/3] x86: enlightenment for ticket spinlocks

[H. Peter Anvin]

On 01/30/2010 05:42 PM, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> 
> + * EBX-EDX: "XenVMMXenVMM" signature, allowing positive identification
> + *      of a Xen host.
> + */
> +#define XEN_CPUID_SIGNATURE_EBX 0x566e6558 /* "XenV" */
> +#define XEN_CPUID_SIGNATURE_ECX 0x65584d4d /* "MMXe" */
> +#define XEN_CPUID_SIGNATURE_EDX 0x4d4d566e /* "nVMM" */
> 
> I hope you know this spells "MMXenVMMXenV".  The ordering is ecx-edx-ebx
> (register numbers 1, 2, 3).
> 

... and of course I got it wrong, too.  It spells "XenVnVMMMMXe".

The proper order is ebx-edx-ecx, in *reverse* numerical order.
Confusing, yes.

	-hpa

-- 
H. Peter Anvin, Intel Open Source Technology Center
I work for Intel.  I don't speak on their behalf.

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/