[Public] On 6/22/22 07:22, Kalra, Ashish wrote: >> As I replied previously on the same subject: Architectural implies >> that it is defined in the APM and shouldn't change in such a way as to >> not be backward compatible. I probably think the wording here should >> be architecture independent or more precisely platform independent. >Yeah, arch-independent and non-architectural are quite different concepts. >At Intel, at least, when someone says "not architectural" mean that the behavior is implementation-specific. That, combined with the model/family/stepping gave me the wrong impression about what was going on. >Some more clarity would be greatly appreciated. Actually, the PPR for family 19h Model 01h, Rev B1 defines the RMP entry format as below: 2.1.4.2 RMP Entry Format Architecturally the format of RMP entries are not specified in APM. In order to assist software, the following table specifies select portions of the RMP entry format for this specific product. Each RMP entry is 16B in size and is formatted as follows. Software should not rely on any field definitions not specified in this table and the format of an RMP entry may change in future processors. Architectural implies that it is defined in the APM and shouldn't change in such a way as to not be backward compatible. So non-architectural in this context means that it is only defined in our PPR. So actually this RPM entry definition is platform dependent and will need to be changed for different AMD processors and that change has to be handled correspondingly in the dump_rmpentry() code. Thanks, Ashish
