On Mon, Aug 02, 2021, Zeng Guang wrote: > On 7/29/2021 7:44 AM, Sean Christopherson wrote: > > On Fri, Jul 16, 2021, Zeng Guang wrote: > > > @@ -42,6 +44,13 @@ static void init_vmx_capabilities(struct cpuinfo_x86 *c) > > > rdmsr_safe(MSR_IA32_VMX_PROCBASED_CTLS2, &ign, &supported); > > > c->vmx_capability[SECONDARY_CTLS] = supported; > > > + /* > > > + * For tertiary execution controls MSR, it's actually a 64bit allowed-1. > > > + */ > > > + rdmsr_safe(MSR_IA32_VMX_PROCBASED_CTLS3, &ign, &supported); > > > + c->vmx_capability[TERTIARY_CTLS_LOW] = ign; > > > + c->vmx_capability[TERTIARY_CTLS_HIGH] = supported; > > Assuming only the lower 32 bits are going to be used for the near future (next > > few years), what about defining just TERTIARY_CTLS_LOW and then doing: > > > > /* > > * Tertiary controls are 64-bit allowed-1, so unlikely other MSRs, the > > * upper bits are ignored (because they're not used, yet...). > > */ > > rdmsr_safe(MSR_IA32_VMX_PROCBASED_CTLS3, &supported, &ign); > > c->vmx_capability[TERTIARY_CTLS_LOW] = supported; > > > > I.e. punt the ugliness issue down the road a few years. > Prefer to keep it complete, and use new variables like low/high consistent > with its function meaning. Ok for that ? Ya, either way works.
