> -----Original Message----- > From: Paolo Bonzini [mailto:paolo.bonzini@xxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Paolo > Bonzini > Sent: Thursday, September 18, 2014 10:18 AM > To: Nakajima, Jun; KY Srinivasan > Cc: Mathew John; Theodore Ts'o; John Starks; kvm list; Gleb Natapov; Niels > Ferguson; Andy Lutomirski; David Hepkin; H. Peter Anvin; Jake Oshins; Linux > Virtualization > Subject: Re: Standardizing an MSR or other hypercall to get an RNG seed? > > Il 18/09/2014 19:13, Nakajima, Jun ha scritto: > > In terms of the address for the MSR, I suggest that you choose one > > from the range between 40000000H - 400000FFH. The SDM (35.1 > > ARCHITECTURAL MSRS) says "All existing and future processors will not > > implement any features using any MSR in this range." Hyper-V already > > defines many synthetic MSRs in this range, and I think it would be > > reasonable for you to pick one for this to avoid a conflict? > > KVM is not using any MSR in that range. > > However, I think it would be better to have the MSR (and perhaps CPUID) > outside the hypervisor-reserved ranges, so that it becomes architecturally > defined. In some sense it is similar to the HYPERVISOR CPUID feature. Yes, given that we want this to be hypervisor agnostic. K. Y _______________________________________________ Virtualization mailing list Virtualization@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/virtualization
