[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <c5f99d62-79f3-447a-9280-febb2927f739@zytor.com>
Date: Tue, 17 Jun 2025 17:44:55 -0700
From: Xin Li <xin@...or.com>
To: Sohil Mehta <sohil.mehta@...el.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
kvm@...r.kernel.org
Cc: tglx@...utronix.de, mingo@...hat.com, bp@...en8.de,
dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com, x86@...nel.org, hpa@...or.com,
seanjc@...gle.com, pbonzini@...hat.com, peterz@...radead.org,
brgerst@...il.com, tony.luck@...el.com, fenghuay@...dia.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] x86/traps: Initialize DR7 by writing its
architectural reset value
On 6/17/2025 4:10 PM, Sohil Mehta wrote:
>>
>> +/* DR7_FIXED_1 is also used as the init/reset value for DR7 */
>> +#define DR7_FIXED_1 0x00000400
>> +
> Did you mean to describe what DR7_FIXED_1 is, and then say it is also
> used as the init/reset value? Because the way the comment is framed
> right now, it seems something is missing.
I probably should add a short version of Sean's description here.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists