>>> On 24.06.16 at 12:56, <kevin.t...@intel.com> wrote: >> From: kaih.li...@gmail.com [mailto:kaih.li...@gmail.com] >> Sent: Friday, June 24, 2016 6:45 PM >> --- a/xen/include/asm-x86/msr-index.h >> +++ b/xen/include/asm-x86/msr-index.h >> @@ -133,12 +133,13 @@ >> #define MSR_IA32_VMX_TRUE_EXIT_CTLS 0x48f >> #define MSR_IA32_VMX_TRUE_ENTRY_CTLS 0x490 >> #define MSR_IA32_VMX_VMFUNC 0x491 >> -#define IA32_FEATURE_CONTROL_MSR 0x3a >> +#define MSR_IA32_FEATURE_CONTROL 0x3a > > Instead of moving MSR definition up here, better move all related lines > down since original place is more sorted regarding to 0x3a.
I agree. >> #define IA32_FEATURE_CONTROL_MSR_LOCK 0x0001 >> #define IA32_FEATURE_CONTROL_MSR_ENABLE_VMXON_INSIDE_SMX 0x0002 >> #define IA32_FEATURE_CONTROL_MSR_ENABLE_VMXON_OUTSIDE_SMX 0x0004 >> #define IA32_FEATURE_CONTROL_MSR_SENTER_PARAM_CTL 0x7f00 >> #define IA32_FEATURE_CONTROL_MSR_ENABLE_SENTER 0x8000 >> +#define IA32_FEATURE_CONTROL_MSR_SGX_ENABLE 0x40000 > > suppose above macros better be changed in same style? Or is it > really meaningful to keep whole MSR name in every bit definition? > Is it clearly enough to just keep strings after _MSR_? I partly agree. The _MSR_ infix is clearly pointless. I wouldn't, however, like to see the IA32_FEATURE_CONTROL_ prefix dropped, as it helps associating the bits with their MSR. Jan _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xen.org http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
