Dor Laor wrote: >>>> This is for the TPR right? VT has special logic to handle TPR >>>> virtualization doesn't it? I thought SVM did too... >>>> >>>> >>> Yes, the TPR. Both VT and SVM virtualize CR8 in 64-bit mode. SVM >>> also supports CR8 in 32-bit mode through a nwe instruction encoding, >>> but >>> nobody uses that to my knowledge. Maybe some brave soul can hack kvm >>> to patch the new instruction in place of the mmio instruction Windows >>> uses >>> to bang on the tpr. >>> >> Actually VT has virtual TPR support that does not require CR8. We >> submitted a patch for Xen. Please see >> http://lists.xensource.com/archives/html/xen-devel/2007-03/msg00993.htm >> > l > >> The spec should be available soon. We are working on a patch for KVM. >> >> Jun >> > > That's superb! Windows gives us really bad time with all of those TPR > accesses. Because of that we currently prefer of using the non-acpi HAL. > > On what version on chip is this feature supported? > > This pushes towards in kernel apic too. Can't see how we avoid it. >
Does it really? IIUC, we would avoid TPR traps entirely and would just need to synchronize the TPR whenever we go down to userspace. Regards, Anthony Liguori ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share your opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys-and earn cash http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.php&p=sourceforge&CID=DEVDEV _______________________________________________ kvm-devel mailing list kvm-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/kvm-devel
