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

[Christoph Egger <Christoph.Egger@xxxxxxx>]

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.

PV guests never read MCE MSRs directly. They install a trap handler and
use the hypercall to fetch the error telemetry. The xen interface is
common to both AMD and Intel - it's basically just an array of bytes.
The first bytes tell you how you can cast and interpret the bytes.
That *content* is specific to AMD or Intel.

How much logic can be shared is almost a matter of software design
and not hardware design.

Christoph

-- 
---to satisfy European Law for business letters:
Advanced Micro Devices GmbH
Einsteinring 24, 85689 Dornach b. Muenchen
Geschaeftsfuehrer: Alberto Bozzo, Andrew Bowd
Sitz: Dornach, Gemeinde Aschheim, Landkreis Muenchen
Registergericht Muenchen, HRB Nr. 43632


_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel