On 01/06/2012 08:37 AM, Zhang, Yang Z wrote:
VMSTATE_BUFFER(cmos_data, RTCState),
VMSTATE_UINT8(cmos_index, RTCState),
-VMSTATE_INT32(current_tm.tm_sec, RTCState),
-VMSTATE_INT32(current_tm.tm_min, RTCState),
-VMSTATE_INT32(current_tm.tm_hour, RTCState)
Avi Kivity wrote:
> > Can you think of a case where we need to perform alignment checking in
> > the emulator?
>
> The case that x86/svm.c is checking for is a security issue.
>
> Guests don't normally turn eflags.AC on, so I don't expect issues
> there. I also don't see issues with SSE alignm
The movdqa instruction performs a 128-bit vector move and requires that
operands are aligned in memory. Unlike the movdqu instruction, a #GP is
raised if operands are unaligned.
This patch does not exercise misalignment because the CPU detects
misalignment while still inside the guest and raises
On 01/09/2012 10:52 AM, Takuya Yoshikawa wrote:
> Avi Kivity wrote:
>
> > > Can you think of a case where we need to perform alignment checking in
> > > the emulator?
> >
> > The case that x86/svm.c is checking for is a security issue.
> >
> > Guests don't normally turn eflags.AC on, so I don't
Hello, I have an Ubuntu Server with KVM, the extensions in the BIOS are
enabled:
root@cluster03:~# kvm-ok
INFO: Your CPU supports KVM extensions
INFO: /dev/kvm exists
KVM acceleration can be used
The problem is that when i do a save of a virtual machine, the screen
freezes and the ping does not
Hi
Please send in any agenda items you are interested in covering.
Thanks, Juan.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kvm" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
On Fri, Dec 16, 2011 at 06:13:42PM +0800, Xiao Guangrong wrote:
> unsync is only used for the page of level == 1 and unsync_children is only
> used in the upper page, so combine them to reduce the size of shadow page
> structure
>
> Signed-off-by: Xiao Guangrong
> ---
> Documentation/virtual/kvm
On Fri, Dec 16, 2011 at 06:14:24PM +0800, Xiao Guangrong wrote:
> Upper page do not need to be tracked the status bit, it is safe to set the
> dirty and let cpu to happily prefetch it
>
> Signed-off-by: Xiao Guangrong
> ---
> arch/x86/kvm/mmu.c | 13 +
> 1 files changed, 5 insertio
On Fri, Dec 16, 2011 at 06:18:10PM +0800, Xiao Guangrong wrote:
> get_written_sptes is called twice in kvm_mmu_pte_write, one of them can be
> removed
>
> Signed-off-by: Xiao Guangrong
> ---
> arch/x86/kvm/mmu.c |6 ++
> 1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
Applied, thanks.
On 2012-01-07 18:52, Binarus wrote:
> Dear all,
>
> we are running a fairly complex fax system in a KVM guest.
>
> The KVM host is Ubuntu 11.04 (64 bit), the guest is Windows 2003 R2 server.
>
> The fax system needs ISDN hardware, so we have tried to passthrough a PCI
> ISDN card (AVM Fritz!car
Hello,
one of our VMs regularly get stuck: the VM is completely unresponsive (no ssh,
no serial console, no VNC). Using "gdbserver" and a remote system to debug
the running VM, I see 3 CPUs (1,3,4) stuck in
pgd_alloc() → spin_lock_irqsave(pgd_lock)
while the 4th CPU (2) is waiting in
pgd_alloc
On Mon, 2012-01-09 at 09:07 +0200, Pekka Enberg wrote:
> On Mon, 9 Jan 2012, Matt Evans wrote:
> > This commit adds a target for 'lkvm-static' which is linked -static.
> >
> > (This can be useful to construct kvmtool binaries for minimalist
> > auto-test host filesystems.)
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Ma
On Sun, Dec 18, 2011 at 10:48:12PM +0200, Vadim Rozenfeld wrote:
> With the following series of patches we are starting to implement
> some basic Microsoft Hyper-V Enlightenment functionality. This series
> is mostly about adding support for relaxed timing, spinlock,
> and virtual apic.
>
> For mo
On Fri, Jan 06, 2012 at 11:13:56AM -0500, Boris Ostrovsky wrote:
> From: Boris Ostrovsky
>
> In some cases guests should not provide workarounds for errata even when the
> physical processor is affected. For example, because of erratum 400 on family
> 10h processors a Linux guest will read an MSR
On Wed, Jan 04, 2012 at 02:04:37PM -0200, Jan Kiszka wrote:
> On 2011-12-19 15:35, Marcelo Tosatti wrote:
> > On Wed, Dec 14, 2011 at 01:15:54PM +0100, Jan Kiszka wrote:
> >> As the qemu-kvm version of the i8259 contains KVM bits, it still has to
> >> be compiled per target. This unbreaks migration
On Wed, Jan 04, 2012 at 03:06:43PM +0900, Takuya Yoshikawa wrote:
> It is possible that the __set_bit() in mark_page_dirty() is called
> simultaneously on the same region of memory, which may result in only
> one bit being set, because some callers do not take mmu_lock before
> mark_page_dirty().
>
On Wed, Jan 04, 2012 at 10:25:19AM +0100, Carsten Otte wrote:
> Hi Avi,
>
> after some more discussion about how to do storage keys proper, I could
> not come up with a sane and safe way of doing SSKE without either
> over or underindicating the change bit in corner cases (leads to
> corrupted gue
On 05/01/12 10:54, Christian Borntraeger wrote:
> Avi, Marcelo,
>
> here is the latest update of my patch set about guest registers in kvm_run.
> I have added an u64 flag field to make the whole structure extensible
> (and shrinkable).
> For s390 I added the prefix register as read-only and access
On 27.12.2011, at 10:45, Avi Kivity wrote:
> On 12/25/2011 12:58 PM, Alexander Graf wrote:
>> Hi Avi,
>>
>> Here are a couple compile/trivial fixes for PPC KVM. Please make sure
>> they all get to 3.2, worst case through -stable.
>>
>> I left out all the other fine commits that would be great t
On Mon, Jan 09, 2012 at 01:37:17PM +0100, Christian Borntraeger wrote:
> On 05/01/12 10:54, Christian Borntraeger wrote:
> > Avi, Marcelo,
> >
> > here is the latest update of my patch set about guest registers in kvm_run.
> > I have added an u64 flag field to make the whole structure extensible
>
On 01/09/2012 02:49 PM, Marcelo Tosatti wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 09, 2012 at 01:37:17PM +0100, Christian Borntraeger wrote:
> > On 05/01/12 10:54, Christian Borntraeger wrote:
> > > Avi, Marcelo,
> > >
> > > here is the latest update of my patch set about guest registers in
> > > kvm_run.
> > > I hav
On 22.12.2011, at 12:56, Christian Borntraeger wrote:
> From: Christian Borntraeger
>
> On some cpus the overhead for virtualization instructions is in the same
> range as a system call. Having to call multiple ioctls to get set registers
> will make userspace handled exits more expensive than
On 05.01.2012, at 10:54, Christian Borntraeger wrote:
> On some cpus the overhead for virtualization instructions is in the same
> range as a system call. Having to call multiple ioctls to get set registers
> will make certain userspace handled exits more expensive than necessary.
> Lets provide
On 05.01.2012, at 10:54, Christian Borntraeger wrote:
> The prefix register is a read-mostly value that is necessary to emulate
> memory accesses on behalf of the guest cpu in an architecture compliant
> way. Avoid an additional ioctl by providing the prefix content in the
> r/o section of kvm_ru
On 01/09/2012 03:01 PM, Alexander Graf wrote:
> On 05.01.2012, at 10:54, Christian Borntraeger wrote:
>
> > On some cpus the overhead for virtualization instructions is in the same
> > range as a system call. Having to call multiple ioctls to get set registers
> > will make certain userspace handle
On 05.01.2012, at 10:54, Christian Borntraeger wrote:
> This patch adds the general purpose registers to the kvm_run structure.
>
> Signed-off-by: Christian Borntraeger
> ---
> arch/s390/include/asm/kvm.h |2 ++
> arch/s390/include/asm/kvm_host.h |3 +--
> arch/s390/kvm/diag.c
On 06.01.2012, at 06:32, Matt Evans wrote:
> Hey Alex,
>
> On 24/12/11 00:39, Alexander Graf wrote:
>>
>> On 23.12.2011, at 14:26, Matt Evans wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> On 23/12/2011, at 11:58 PM, Alexander Graf wrote:
>>>
On 13.12.2011, at 07:21, Matt Evans wrote:
> Different ar
On 05.01.2012, at 10:06, Liu Yu wrote:
> from the kvm guest paravirt init code.
Your patch description could be slightly more ... verbose :)
>
> Signed-off-by: Liu Yu
> ---
> arch/powerpc/include/asm/epapr_hcalls.h |8 +
> arch/powerpc/kernel/Makefile|1 +
> arch/powerpc
PCI 2.3 allows to generically disable IRQ sources at device level. This
enables us to share legacy IRQs of such devices with other host devices
when passing them to a guest.
The new IRQ sharing feature introduced here is optional, user space has
to request it explicitly. Moreover, user space can i
On 05.01.2012, at 10:06, Liu Yu wrote:
> If the guest hypervisor node contains "has-idle" property.
>
> Signed-off-by: Liu Yu
> ---
> v2:
> 1. move the idle code into assembly.
> 2. move the part that check "has-idle" into epapr code.
>
> arch/powerpc/include/asm/epapr_hcalls.h |1 +
> arch
On 05.01.2012, at 10:07, Liu Yu wrote:
> And add a new flag definition in kvm_ppc_pvinfo to indicate
> whether host support EV_IDLE hcall.
>
> Signed-off-by: Liu Yu
> ---
> v2:
> 1. instead of adding new field in kvm_ppc_pvinfo, use flags.
> 2. expose hcall definitions to userspace
>
> arch/po
On 21.12.2011, at 02:34, Scott Wood wrote:
> Currently 32-bit only cares about this for choice of exception
> vector, which is done in core-specific code. However, KVM will
> want to distinguish as well.
>
> Signed-off-by: Scott Wood
> ---
> arch/powerpc/include/asm/cputable.h |5 +++--
> 1
On 21.12.2011, at 02:34, Scott Wood wrote:
> We'll use it on e500mc as well.
>
> Signed-off-by: Scott Wood
> ---
> arch/powerpc/include/asm/kvm_book3s.h |3 ++
> arch/powerpc/include/asm/kvm_booke.h |3 ++
> arch/powerpc/include/asm/kvm_ppc.h|5
> arch/powerpc/kvm/book3s_64_m
> -Original Message-
> From: kvm-ppc-ow...@vger.kernel.org [mailto:kvm-ppc-ow...@vger.kernel.org] On
> Behalf Of
> Alexander Graf
> Sent: Monday, January 09, 2012 8:15 AM
> To: Liu Yu-B13201
> Cc: kvm-...@vger.kernel.org; kvm@vger.kernel.org; ga...@kernel.crashing.org;
> Wood Scott-
> B
On 09.01.2012, at 17:04, Yoder Stuart-B08248 wrote:
>
>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: kvm-ppc-ow...@vger.kernel.org [mailto:kvm-ppc-ow...@vger.kernel.org]
>> On Behalf Of
>> Alexander Graf
>> Sent: Monday, January 09, 2012 8:15 AM
>> To: Liu Yu-B13201
>> Cc: kvm-...@vger.kernel.org; k
On 21.12.2011, at 02:34, Scott Wood wrote:
> tlbilx is the new, preferred invalidation instruction. It is not
> found on e500 prior to e500mc, but there should be no harm in
> supporting it on all e500.
>
> Based on code from Ashish Kalra .
>
> Signed-off-by: Scott Wood
> ---
> arch/powerpc/k
On 12/21/2011 03:34 AM, Scott Wood wrote:
> Add processor support for e500mc, using hardware virtualization support
> (GS-mode).
>
> Current issues include:
> - No support for external proxy (coreint) interrupt mode in the guest.
>
> Includes work by Ashish Kalra ,
> Varun Sethi , and
> Liu Yu .
>
On 21.12.2011, at 02:34, Scott Wood wrote:
> e500mc has a normal PPC FPU, rather than SPE which is found
> on e500v1/v2.
>
> Based on code from Liu Yu .
>
> Signed-off-by: Scott Wood
> ---
> arch/powerpc/include/asm/system.h |1 +
> arch/powerpc/kvm/booke.c | 44 +
From: Boris Ostrovsky
In some cases guests should not provide workarounds for errata even when the
physical processor is affected. For example, because of erratum 400 on family
10h processors a Linux guest will read an MSR (resulting in VMEXIT) before
going to idle in order to avoid getting stuck
On 01/06/2012 06:52 PM, Alexander Graf wrote:
>
>
> On 06.01.2012, at 20:32, Scott Wood wrote:
>
>> On 01/05/2012 10:15 PM, Alexander Graf wrote:
>>
>>> +/*
>>> + * Architecture specific registers are to be defined in arch headers and
>>> + * ORed with the arch identifier.
>>> + */
>>> +#define
On 01/09/2012 09:21 AM, Alexander Graf wrote:
>
> On 21.12.2011, at 02:34, Scott Wood wrote:
>
>> Currently 32-bit only cares about this for choice of exception
>> vector, which is done in core-specific code. However, KVM will
>> want to distinguish as well.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Scott Wood
>> -
On 01/09/2012 10:33 AM, Avi Kivity wrote:
> On 12/21/2011 03:34 AM, Scott Wood wrote:
>> Add processor support for e500mc, using hardware virtualization support
>> (GS-mode).
>>
>> Current issues include:
>> - No support for external proxy (coreint) interrupt mode in the guest.
>>
>> Includes work
On Mon, 2012-01-09 at 15:03 +0100, Jan Kiszka wrote:
> PCI 2.3 allows to generically disable IRQ sources at device level. This
> enables us to share legacy IRQs of such devices with other host devices
> when passing them to a guest.
>
> The new IRQ sharing feature introduced here is optional, user
On 01/06/2012 07:14 PM, Alexander Graf wrote:
>
> On 06.01.2012, at 22:12, Scott Wood wrote:
>
>> On 01/05/2012 08:35 PM, Alexander Graf wrote:
>>> Also we're already using KVM_REG for MMIO register identifiers. But I guess
>>> we can just reuse the namespace as long as we're careful to not over
On 01/09/2012 08:15 AM, Alexander Graf wrote:
>
> On 05.01.2012, at 10:07, Liu Yu wrote:
>
>> diff --git a/arch/powerpc/kvm/powerpc.c b/arch/powerpc/kvm/powerpc.c
>> index c33f6a7..1242ee1 100644
>> --- a/arch/powerpc/kvm/powerpc.c
>> +++ b/arch/powerpc/kvm/powerpc.c
>> @@ -81,6 +81,10 @@ int kvm
Not sure if it actually makes sense to send a patch with this as I have
more problems to describe than lines that actually fix something - but
well, this hack at least makes some hardware task switches into/out of
VM86 work for me that failed before.
So what I really intend is to get information o
Am 09.01.2012 um 20:07 schrieb Scott Wood :
> On 01/06/2012 06:52 PM, Alexander Graf wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 06.01.2012, at 20:32, Scott Wood wrote:
>>
>>> On 01/05/2012 10:15 PM, Alexander Graf wrote:
>>>
+/*
+ * Architecture specific registers are to be defined in arch headers and
>>
On 01/09/2012 02:11 PM, Alexander Graf wrote:
>
>
> Am 09.01.2012 um 20:07 schrieb Scott Wood :
>
>> On 01/06/2012 06:52 PM, Alexander Graf wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> On 06.01.2012, at 20:32, Scott Wood wrote:
>>>
On 01/05/2012 10:15 PM, Alexander Graf wrote:
> +/*
> + * Architecture
Am 09.01.2012 um 21:12 schrieb Scott Wood :
> On 01/09/2012 02:11 PM, Alexander Graf wrote:
>>
>>
>> Am 09.01.2012 um 20:07 schrieb Scott Wood :
>>
>>> On 01/06/2012 06:52 PM, Alexander Graf wrote:
On 06.01.2012, at 20:32, Scott Wood wrote:
> On 01/05/2012 10:15 PM
Am 09.01.2012 um 21:00 schrieb Scott Wood :
> On 01/09/2012 08:15 AM, Alexander Graf wrote:
>>
>> On 05.01.2012, at 10:07, Liu Yu wrote:
>>
>>> diff --git a/arch/powerpc/kvm/powerpc.c b/arch/powerpc/kvm/powerpc.c
>>> index c33f6a7..1242ee1 100644
>>> --- a/arch/powerpc/kvm/powerpc.c
>>> +++ b/
On 01/05/2012 03:06 AM, Liu Yu wrote:
> diff --git a/arch/powerpc/kernel/idle_e500.S b/arch/powerpc/kernel/idle_e500.S
> index 3e2b95c..6ea95f0 100644
> --- a/arch/powerpc/kernel/idle_e500.S
> +++ b/arch/powerpc/kernel/idle_e500.S
> @@ -85,6 +85,23 @@ END_FTR_SECTION_IFSET(CPU_FTR_L2CSR|CPU_FTR_CAN
On 2012-01-09 20:45, Alex Williamson wrote:
> On Mon, 2012-01-09 at 15:03 +0100, Jan Kiszka wrote:
>> PCI 2.3 allows to generically disable IRQ sources at device level. This
>> enables us to share legacy IRQs of such devices with other host devices
>> when passing them to a guest.
>>
>> The new IRQ
On 01/09/2012 11:48 AM, Alexander Graf wrote:
>
> On 21.12.2011, at 02:34, Scott Wood wrote:
>> +#ifdef CONFIG_PPC_FPU
>> +/* Save userspace FPU state in stack */
>> +enable_kernel_fp();
>> +memcpy(fpr, current->thread.fpr, sizeof(current->thread.fpr));
>> +fpscr = current->thread.
On Mon, 2012-01-09 at 22:25 +0100, Jan Kiszka wrote:
> On 2012-01-09 20:45, Alex Williamson wrote:
> > On Mon, 2012-01-09 at 15:03 +0100, Jan Kiszka wrote:
> >> +static int kvm_vm_ioctl_set_pci_irq_mask(struct kvm *kvm,
> >> + struct kvm_assigned_pci_dev *assigned_dev)
> >> +{
> >> + int
On 09.01.2012, at 22:48, Scott Wood wrote:
> On 01/09/2012 11:48 AM, Alexander Graf wrote:
>>
>> On 21.12.2011, at 02:34, Scott Wood wrote:
>>> +#ifdef CONFIG_PPC_FPU
>>> + /* Save userspace FPU state in stack */
>>> + enable_kernel_fp();
>>> + memcpy(fpr, current->thread.fpr, sizeof(curre
On 2012-01-09 23:05, Alex Williamson wrote:
> On Mon, 2012-01-09 at 22:25 +0100, Jan Kiszka wrote:
>> On 2012-01-09 20:45, Alex Williamson wrote:
>>> On Mon, 2012-01-09 at 15:03 +0100, Jan Kiszka wrote:
+static int kvm_vm_ioctl_set_pci_irq_mask(struct kvm *kvm,
+ struct kvm_assig
On 01/09/2012 02:18 PM, Alexander Graf wrote:
>
>
> Am 09.01.2012 um 21:00 schrieb Scott Wood :
>
>> On 01/09/2012 08:15 AM, Alexander Graf wrote:
>>>
>>> On 05.01.2012, at 10:07, Liu Yu wrote:
>>>
diff --git a/arch/powerpc/kvm/powerpc.c b/arch/powerpc/kvm/powerpc.c
index c33f6a7..1242
On 01/09/2012 04:17 PM, Alexander Graf wrote:
>
> On 09.01.2012, at 22:48, Scott Wood wrote:
>
>> On 01/09/2012 11:48 AM, Alexander Graf wrote:
>>>
>>> Do you think it's possible to combine this with the book3s_pr code, so we
>>> don't duplicate too much here?
>>
>> book3s_pr is a bit different
> >> Hrm. This will return on signal. So if the guest sends an idle hcall,
> >> then user space gets a random signal, we'll continue executing the
> >> guest CPU, getting us out of idle even though the guest didn't expect it,
> >> since the guest
> really wants to get an interrupt after the idle
On 09.01.2012, at 23:39, Scott Wood wrote:
> On 01/09/2012 04:17 PM, Alexander Graf wrote:
>>
>> On 09.01.2012, at 22:48, Scott Wood wrote:
>>
>>> On 01/09/2012 11:48 AM, Alexander Graf wrote:
Do you think it's possible to combine this with the book3s_pr code, so we
don't dupli
On 09.01.2012, at 23:41, Yoder Stuart-B08248 wrote:
>
Hrm. This will return on signal. So if the guest sends an idle hcall,
then user space gets a random signal, we'll continue executing the
guest CPU, getting us out of idle even though the guest didn't expect it,
since the
On 01/09/2012 04:47 PM, Alexander Graf wrote:
>
> On 09.01.2012, at 23:39, Scott Wood wrote:
>
>> On 01/09/2012 04:17 PM, Alexander Graf wrote:
>>>
>>> On 09.01.2012, at 22:48, Scott Wood wrote:
>>>
On 01/09/2012 11:48 AM, Alexander Graf wrote:
> I'm having a hard time to grasp when shar
On 09.01.2012, at 23:54, Scott Wood wrote:
> On 01/09/2012 04:47 PM, Alexander Graf wrote:
>>
>> On 09.01.2012, at 23:39, Scott Wood wrote:
>>
>>> On 01/09/2012 04:17 PM, Alexander Graf wrote:
On 09.01.2012, at 22:48, Scott Wood wrote:
> On 01/09/2012 11:48 AM, Alexander Gr
Am 09.01.2012 12:29, schrieb Juan Quintela:
> Please send in any agenda items you are interested in covering.
Coordination of second QOM series: Who fixes what and til when.
Andreas
--
SUSE LINUX Products GmbH, Maxfeldstr. 5, 90409 Nürnberg, Germany
GF: Jeff Hawn, Jennifer Guild, Felix Imendörf
On 01/09/2012 11:46 AM, Alexander Graf wrote:
>
> On 21.12.2011, at 02:34, Scott Wood wrote:
>
>> Chips such as e500mc that implement category E.HV in Power ISA 2.06
>> provide hardware virtualization features, including a new MSR mode for
>> guest state. The guest OS can perform many operations
(2012/01/10 5:10), Kevin Wolf wrote:
> * May the emulator access the vcpu or should this go through a new
>x86_emulate_ops.set_rflags function pointer?
I think the latter is better.
Accessing the vcpu from the emulator looks like a layer violation.
Takuya
--
To unsubscribe from this l
On 10.01.2012, at 01:51, Scott Wood wrote:
> On 01/09/2012 11:46 AM, Alexander Graf wrote:
>>
>> On 21.12.2011, at 02:34, Scott Wood wrote:
>>
>>> Chips such as e500mc that implement category E.HV in Power ISA 2.06
>>> provide hardware virtualization features, including a new MSR mode for
>>> g
(2012/01/10 5:10), Kevin Wolf wrote:
> @@ -2254,7 +2258,14 @@ static int load_state_from_tss32(struct
> x86_emulate_ctxt *ctxt,
> if (ctxt->ops->set_cr(ctxt, 3, tss->cr3))
> return emulate_gp(ctxt, 0);
> ctxt->_eip = tss->eip;
> +
> ctxt->eflags = tss->eflags | 2;
On 01/09/2012 07:16 PM, Marcelo Tosatti wrote:
> In general, given the number of optimizations made to the shadow mmu
> code, and the fact that over time NPT will dominate, i'd suggest time
> should be spent improving other areas.
>
I totally agree with you, thanks Marcelo!
--
To unsubscribe f
On 01/09/2012 07:30 PM, Marcelo Tosatti wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 16, 2011 at 06:14:24PM +0800, Xiao Guangrong wrote:
>> Upper page do not need to be tracked the status bit, it is safe to set the
>> dirty and let cpu to happily prefetch it
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Xiao Guangrong
>> ---
>> arch/x86/kvm/mm
> -Original Message-
> From: Andreas Färber [mailto:afaer...@suse.de]
> Sent: Saturday, January 07, 2012 1:44 AM
> > use int64 when compare two time
> >
> > int32 only represent only 136 years when comparing two times based on
> second. It would be better to use int64.
>
> int32 and int64
> -Original Message-
> From: Paolo Bonzini [mailto:paolo.bonz...@gmail.com] On Behalf Of Paolo
> Bonzini
> Sent: Monday, January 09, 2012 4:19 PM
> To: Zhang, Yang Z
> Cc: qemu-de...@nongnu.org; a...@redhat.com; aligu...@us.ibm.com; Zhang,
> Xiantao; Shan, Haitao; kvm@vger.kernel.org
> Subj
72 matches
Mail list logo
