> From: Avi Kivity [mailto:a...@redhat.com]
> Sent: Thursday, May 27, 2010 3:16 AM
>
> On 05/27/2010 12:27 PM, Wang, Shane wrote:
> > Jan Kiszka wrote:
> >
> >> The latter. As we have no clue about the actual state (tboot is not
> >> exported on older kernels), we are forced to assume some reasona
On 05/27/2010 12:27 PM, Wang, Shane wrote:
Jan Kiszka wrote:
The latter. As we have no clue about the actual state (tboot is not
exported on older kernels), we are forced to assume some reasonable
state.
Are you trying to load the latest KVM on the older kernels?
He is, look at
Jan Kiszka wrote:
> The latter. As we have no clue about the actual state (tboot is not
> exported on older kernels), we are forced to assume some reasonable
> state.
Are you trying to load the latest KVM on the older kernels?
Shane
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kv
Wang, Shane wrote:
> Jan Kiszka wrote:
>> If TXT is on and VT is locked but KVM sees tboot_enabled == 0, it
>> won't check for FEATURE_CONTROL_VMXON_ENABLED_INSIDE_SMX during setup
>> and may consider VT unavailable.
>
> If vt is locked, txt is on, tboot_enabled = 0, then it will check
> VMXON_OU
Jan Kiszka wrote:
> If TXT is on and VT is locked but KVM sees tboot_enabled == 0, it
> won't check for FEATURE_CONTROL_VMXON_ENABLED_INSIDE_SMX during setup
> and may consider VT unavailable.
If vt is locked, txt is on, tboot_enabled = 0, then it will check
VMXON_OUTSIDE_SMX.
But at this point,
Wang, Shane wrote:
> Jan Kiszka wrote:
>> Wang, Shane wrote:
>>> Avi Kivity wrote:
On 05/26/2010 10:25 AM, Jan Kiszka wrote:
> This is for CONFIG_INTEL_TXT enabled? Good point but needs to be
> solved differently. tboot, the variable that is checked by the
> original header, is not
Wang, Shane wrote:
>
> Why is VTX assumed to be disabled?
> tboot_enabled == 0 but (msr &
> FEATURE_CONTROL_VMXON_ENABLED_OUTSIDE_SMX) == 1 if you have VT
> enabled. If you have VT enabled, VMX outside SMX is 1 always.
>
> Shane
BTW:
In hardware,
VT is enabled, TXT is enabled, then outside = 1,
Jan Kiszka wrote:
> Wang, Shane wrote:
>> Avi Kivity wrote:
>>> On 05/26/2010 10:25 AM, Jan Kiszka wrote:
This is for CONFIG_INTEL_TXT enabled? Good point but needs to be
solved differently. tboot, the variable that is checked by the
original header, is not exported to modules. I won
Wang, Shane wrote:
> Avi Kivity wrote:
>> On 05/26/2010 10:25 AM, Jan Kiszka wrote:
>>> This is for CONFIG_INTEL_TXT enabled? Good point but needs to be
>>> solved differently. tboot, the variable that is checked by the
>>> original header, is not exported to modules. I wonder how this
>>> worked o
Avi Kivity wrote:
> On 05/26/2010 10:25 AM, Jan Kiszka wrote:
>>
>> This is for CONFIG_INTEL_TXT enabled? Good point but needs to be
>> solved differently. tboot, the variable that is checked by the
>> original header, is not exported to modules. I wonder how this
>> worked out for you...
>>
>>
On 05/26/2010 10:25 AM, Jan Kiszka wrote:
This is for CONFIG_INTEL_TXT enabled? Good point but needs to be solved
differently. tboot, the variable that is checked by the original header,
is not exported to modules. I wonder how this worked out for you...
Solution should be: hack tboot_enabled t
Zachary Amsden wrote:
>
(please post inlined - I have to copy your patch manually now)
> From 614d5fa8bba5f98fd3cb1d66d63b0b70ca98fe51 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> From: Zachary Amsden
> Date: Fri, 14 May 2010 12:25:14 -1000
> Subject: [PATCH 1/5] Fix tboot_enabled macro; was present in 2.6.33
>
12 matches
Mail list logo
