On Wed, Jun 23, 2021 at 11:32:50AM +0200, Borislav Petkov wrote: > Ok, so I took a critical look at this and it doesn't make sense to have > a differently named define each time you need the [63:12] slice of > GHCBData. So you can simply use GHCB_DATA(msr_value) instead, see below. > > Complaints? Looks good to me.
