On Tue, Jan 29, 2019 at 10:27:50AM -0800, Sean Christopherson wrote: > On Tue, Jan 29, 2019 at 10:01:15AM -0800, Jim Mattson wrote: > > On Tue, Jan 29, 2019 at 9:47 AM Jim Mattson <jmattson@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > > On Wed, Jan 23, 2019 at 6:06 AM Yang Weijiang <weijiang.yang@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > Note: Although these VMCS fields are 64-bit, they don't have high fields. > > > > > > This statement directly contradicts the SDM, volume 3, appendix B.2: > > > > > > "A value of 1 in bits 14:13 of an encoding indicates a 64-bit field. > > > There are 64-bit fields only for controls and for guest state. As > > > noted in Section 24.11.2, every 64-bit field has two encodings, which > > > differ on bit 0, the access type. Thus, each such field has an even > > > encoding for full access and an odd encoding for high access." > > > > Ah! They're not actually 64-bit fields. If you look at the encodings > > (0x68XX and 0x6cxx), they're natural-width fields! Natural-width > > fields don't have a high component. > > They're indeed natural width (I actually looked at the spec this time). > > The "_FULL" postfix on VMX_HOST_IA32_INTERRUPT_SSP_TABLE_ADDR_FULL and > VMX_HOST_SSP_FULL is confusing as it generally only shows up on 64-bit > fields. I'll see if we can get the fields renamed to drop "_FULL". I > suggest we preemptively do the same for KVM. Thank you for making it clear! I should have modified the annotation correctly. I'll add a note for this in next version.
