On 22/05/2015 16:17, Radim Krčmář wrote:
> Btw. I had a good laugh on Intel's response to a similar question:
> https://software.intel.com/en-us/forums/topic/305672
Duh... the question is dumb (because he's not doing IRET in SMM), and
the answer is dumber...
Paolo
--
To unsubscribe from this li
2015-05-21 23:21+0200, Paolo Bonzini:
> On 21/05/2015 19:00, Radim Krčmář wrote:
>> Potentially, an NMI could be latched (while in SMM or upon exit) and
>> serviced upon exit [...]
>>
>> This "Potentially" could be in the sense that the whole 3rd paragraph is
>> only applicable to some ancient
2015-05-21 22:24+0200, Paolo Bonzini:
> On 21/05/2015 18:33, Radim Krčmář wrote:
> >> > Check the AMD architecture manual.
> > I must be blind, is there more than Table 10-2?
>
> There's Table 10-1! :DDD
:D I think I understand ...
10-1 says that amd64 doesn't shift the segment's attributes (th
On 21/05/2015 19:00, Radim Krčmář wrote:
> Potentially, an NMI could be latched (while in SMM or upon exit) and
> serviced upon exit [...]
>
> This "Potentially" could be in the sense that the whole 3rd paragraph is
> only applicable to some ancient SMM design :)
It could also be in the sen
On 21/05/2015 18:33, Radim Krčmář wrote:
>> > Check the AMD architecture manual.
> I must be blind, is there more than Table 10-2?
There's Table 10-1! :DDD
Paolo
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More
2015-05-21 18:23+0200, Paolo Bonzini:
> On 21/05/2015 18:20, Radim Krčmář wrote:
>> 2. NMI -> SMI -> IRET -> RSM -> NMI
>> NMI is injected; I think it shouldn't be ... have you based this
>> behavior on the 3rd paragraph of SDM 34.8 NMI HANDLING WHILE IN SMM
>> ("A special case [...]")?
>
> Yes.
2015-05-21 18:21+0200, Paolo Bonzini:
> On 21/05/2015 18:20, Radim Krčmář wrote:
> >
> >> > +set_desc_base(&desc, get_smstate(u32, smbase, offset + 8));
> >> > +set_desc_limit(&desc, get_smstate(u32, smbase, offset + 4));
> >> > +rsm_set_desc_flags(&desc, get_smsta
On 21/05/2015 18:20, Radim Krčmář wrote:
> 2. NMI -> SMI -> IRET -> RSM -> NMI
> NMI is injected; I think it shouldn't be ... have you based this
> behavior on the 3rd paragraph of SDM 34.8 NMI HANDLING WHILE IN SMM
> ("A special case [...]")?
Yes.
> Why I think we should restore NMI mask on R
On 21/05/2015 18:20, Radim Krčmář wrote:
>
>> > + set_desc_base(&desc, get_smstate(u32, smbase, offset + 8));
>> > + set_desc_limit(&desc, get_smstate(u32, smbase, offset + 4));
>> > + rsm_set_desc_flags(&desc, get_smstate(u32, smbase, offset));
> (There wan't a layout where this wou
2015-05-08 13:20+0200, Paolo Bonzini:
> The big ugly one. This patch adds support for switching in and out of
> system management mode, respectively upon receiving KVM_REQ_SMI and upon
> executing a RSM instruction. Both 32- and 64-bit formats are supported
> for the SMM state save area.
>
> Sig
10 matches
Mail list logo
