[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20090413082603.GS14687@one.firstfloor.org>
Date: Mon, 13 Apr 2009 10:26:03 +0200
From: Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>
To: Avi Kivity <avi@...hat.com>
Cc: Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>,
Huang Ying <ying.huang@...el.com>,
"kvm@...r.kernel.org" <kvm@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Add MCE support to KVM
On Sat, Apr 11, 2009 at 03:25:19PM +0300, Avi Kivity wrote:
> Andi Kleen wrote:
> >>Right, but we can allocate the maximum number, no? it's a fairly small
> >>amount of memory.
> >>
> >
> >There are 255 banks worst case which need upto 4 (in theory 5) MSRs each
> >
> >
>
> That's 8KB, which would normally not be allocated. But I think we can
> live with it.
>
> Do we actually need to support 255 banks?
Probably not. Current CPUs all have a single digit number.
e.g. 64 would be plenty for now.
> Or can we support a smaller
> number transparently?
Not transparently. In theory software can hardcode that for cpu model X bank Y
is available and does Z. Software doesn't have too, Intel provides a bank
independent way to report errors too, but we don't know if everyone uses it.
Linux doesn't rely on bank numbers on Intel at least.
-Andi
--
ak@...ux.intel.com -- Speaking for myself only.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists