[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CALMp9eRrm7B_6MyNxuBGxm8WvgvkDcC=XrZ9dRK4pi=qQ=BuRw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 6 Jul 2022 13:11:02 -0700
From: Jim Mattson <jmattson@...gle.com>
To: Sean Christopherson <seanjc@...gle.com>
Cc: Maxim Levitsky <mlevitsk@...hat.com>,
Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>,
Vitaly Kuznetsov <vkuznets@...hat.com>,
Wanpeng Li <wanpengli@...cent.com>,
Joerg Roedel <joro@...tes.org>, kvm@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Oliver Upton <oupton@...gle.com>,
Peter Shier <pshier@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 00/21] KVM: x86: Event/exception fixes and cleanups
On Wed, Jul 6, 2022 at 10:52 AM Sean Christopherson <seanjc@...gle.com> wrote:
> Hmm, I'm not entirely convinced that Intel doesn't interpret "internal to the
> processor" as "undocumented SMRAM fields". But I could also be misremembering
> the SMI flows.
Start using reserved SMRAM, and you will regret it when the vendor
assigns some new bit of state to the same location.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists