On Thu, 1 Aug 2024 15:36:10 +0530 Manish <manish.mis...@nutanix.com> wrote:
> On 31/07/24 9:01 pm, Xiaoyao Li wrote: > > !-------------------------------------------------------------------| > > CAUTION: External Email > > > > |-------------------------------------------------------------------! > > > > On 7/31/2024 4:49 PM, John Levon wrote: > >> On Wed, Jul 31, 2024 at 03:02:15PM +0800, Xiaoyao Li wrote: > >> > >>>> Windows does not expect 0x1f to be present for any CPU model. But > >>>> if it > >>>> is exposed to the guest, it expects non-zero values. > >>> > >>> Please fix Windows! > >> > >> A ticket has been filed with MSFT, we are aware this is a guest bug. > >> > >> But that doesn't really help anybody trying to use Windows right now. > > > > For existing buggy Windows, we can still introduce > > "cpuid-0x1f-enforce" but not make it default on. > > > > People want to boot the buggy Windows needs to opt-in it themselves > > via "-cpu xxx,cpuid-0x1f-enforce=on". This way, we don't have live > > migration issue and it doesn't affect anything. > > > Yes, that makes sense, I will send a updated patch by tomorrow if no one > has any objection with this. I'd rename it to x-have-cpuid-0x1f-leaf (x-) to reflect that it's not stable/maintained and subject to be dropped in future Also please clearly spell out that it's a temporary workaround for ... in commit message. > > > > >> regards > >> john > > > Thanks > > Manish Mishra >
