Re: [Xen-devel] [xen vMCE RFC V0.2] xen vMCE design

[Jan Beulich]

>>> On 03.07.12 at 16:50, Christoph Egger <Christoph.Egger@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> On 07/03/12 15:26, Luck, Tony wrote:
> 
>>> I'm not convinced of the need, and would prefer aiming at a
>>> shared implementation unless issues arise that make this
>>> impossible.
>> 
>> It does sound odd. Yes, Intel and AMD have differences around CMCI ... but 
> we are never
>> going to send a CMCI to a guest (there is no point, it can't do anything 
> useful with the
>> information, it may do something pointlessly stupid like stop using a guest 
> physical page).
>> The only reason I suggested making MCG_CAP pretend that CMCI was supported 
> was a
>> small optimization ... if a Linux guest sees that CMCI is supported, it will 
> not poll the machine
>> check banks looking for corrected errors.
> 
> 
> Are you talking about PV or HVM guest?
> 
> For HVM guests yes it makes sense to disable CMCI in MCG_CAP for both
> AMD and Intel.

"enable" you mean?

Jan

--
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/