On Wed, Apr 17, 2013 at 12:42:30PM +0200, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> Il 16/04/2013 19:28, Gleb Natapov ha scritto:
> > > This does highlight a weakness in CPU_GET_SUPPORTED_CPUID, but I think
> > > this is not a problem in practice.
> > >
> > > With a management layer such as oVirt it's not a problem.
Il 16/04/2013 19:28, Gleb Natapov ha scritto:
> > This does highlight a weakness in CPU_GET_SUPPORTED_CPUID, but I think
> > this is not a problem in practice.
> >
> > With a management layer such as oVirt it's not a problem. For example,
> > oVirt has its own library of processors. It doesn't c
On Tue, Apr 16, 2013 at 01:47:46PM +0200, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> Il 10/04/2013 12:08, Gleb Natapov ha scritto:
> >> > What is the opinion from the KVM folks on this? Shall we start to
> >> > emulate instructions the host does not provide? In this particular case
> >> > a relatively simple patch fix
Note that "Atom" isn't a CPU but a line of CPUs. Sadly Qemu's N270 model is
broken.
Borislav Petkov wrote:
>On Tue, Apr 16, 2013 at 01:47:46PM +0200, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
>> Atom is not defined by QEMU;
>
>$ qemu-system-x86_64 -cpu ?
>
>...
>
>x86 n270 Intel(R) Atom(TM) CPU N270
On Tue, Apr 16, 2013 at 01:47:46PM +0200, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> Atom is not defined by QEMU;
$ qemu-system-x86_64 -cpu ?
...
x86 n270 Intel(R) Atom(TM) CPU N270 @ 1.60GHz
--
Regards/Gruss,
Boris.
Sent from a fat crate under my desk. Formatting is fine.
--
--
To unsubscribe
Il 10/04/2013 12:08, Gleb Natapov ha scritto:
>> > What is the opinion from the KVM folks on this? Shall we start to
>> > emulate instructions the host does not provide? In this particular case
>> > a relatively simple patch fixes a problem (starting Atom optimized
>> > kernels on non-Atom machines
On Wed, Apr 10, 2013 at 12:39:01PM +0200, Andre Przywara wrote:
> On Wed, 10 Apr 2013 13:08:46 +0300
> Gleb Natapov wrote:
>
> > On Wed, Apr 10, 2013 at 11:29:42AM +0200, Andre Przywara wrote:
> > > In a real world VendorSpecific should be replaced with something
> > > more meaningful. Depends on
On Wed, 10 Apr 2013 13:08:46 +0300
Gleb Natapov wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 10, 2013 at 11:29:42AM +0200, Andre Przywara wrote:
> > In a real world VendorSpecific should be replaced with something
> > more meaningful. Depends on KVMs intention to emulate instructions,
> > actually out of scope for a pur
On Wed, Apr 10, 2013 at 12:17:21PM +0200, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 10, 2013 at 01:08:46PM +0300, Gleb Natapov wrote:
> > We can add the emulation, but we should not start announcing the
> > instruction availability to a guest if host cpu does not have it
> > by default. This may trick a
On Wed, Apr 10, 2013 at 01:08:46PM +0300, Gleb Natapov wrote:
> We can add the emulation, but we should not start announcing the
> instruction availability to a guest if host cpu does not have it
> by default. This may trick a guest into thinking that movbe is the
> fastest way to do something when
On Wed, Apr 10, 2013 at 11:29:42AM +0200, Andre Przywara wrote:
> In a real world VendorSpecific should be replaced with something more
> meaningful. Depends on KVMs intention to emulate instructions, actually
> out of scope for a pure virtualizer.
>
Something like EmulateOnUD.
> What is the opin
On Tue, Apr 09, 2013 at 05:04:06PM -0700, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> On 04/09/2013 05:03 PM, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> >
> > Note to self: this destroys the src operand but it shouldn't. Fix it
> > tomorrow.
> >
>
> I thought movbe was already in qemu just not on by default...?
Yep, this went upstr
On Wed, 10 Apr 2013 01:46:02 +0200
Borislav Petkov wrote:
> Hi guys,
>
> so I was trying to repro tglx's bug in smpboot.c and for some reason,
> the most reliable way to trigger it was to boot an 32-bit atom smp
> guest in kvm (don't ask :)).
>
> The problem, however, was that atom wants MOVBE
On 04/09/2013 05:03 PM, Borislav Petkov wrote:
>
> Note to self: this destroys the src operand but it shouldn't. Fix it
> tomorrow.
>
I thought movbe was already in qemu just not on by default...?
-hpa
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kvm" in
the body of a m
On Wed, Apr 10, 2013 at 01:46:02AM +0200, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> +static int em_movbe(struct x86_emulate_ctxt *ctxt)
> +{
> + char *valptr = ctxt->src.valptr;
> +
> + switch (ctxt->op_bytes) {
> + case 2:
> + *(u16 *)valptr = swab16(*(u16 *)valptr);
> + break;
Hi guys,
so I was trying to repro tglx's bug in smpboot.c and for some reason,
the most reliable way to trigger it was to boot an 32-bit atom smp guest
in kvm (don't ask :)).
The problem, however, was that atom wants MOVBE and qemu doesn't emulate
it yet (except Richard's patches which I used in
16 matches
Mail list logo
