Avi Kivity wrote:
>> Please tell me what I can do to help debugging this problem.
>> Alternatively I have uploaded an image to reproduce the problem here:
>> http://temp.aurel32.net/kfreebsd-amd64.img.g
>>
>
> I've downloaded the image and booted it three times using kvm HEAD.
> Each time I
Aurelien Jarno wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I have just updated my system from kvm 28 to kvm 29, and a GNU/kFreeBSD
> amd64 system fails to boot with the following error:
>
> Fatal trap 12 with interrupts disabled
>
>
> Fatal trap 12: page fault while in kernel mode
> fault virtual address = 0x7aa93e0
S.Çağlar Onur wrote:
> Hi;
>
> 18 Tem 2007 Çar tarihinde, Avi Kivity şunları yazmıştı:
>
>>> http://cekirdek.pardus.org.tr/~caglar/kvm/netconsole_wo_apparmor is the
>>> vanilla one's netconsole output, by the way without apparmor patchset
>>> system not hard freezes.
>>>
>> This trace is
Avoid delivering APIC message to non-exist VCPU
and fixes booting 32bit PAE guest issue.
against lapic2 branch.
Signed-off-by: Yaozu (Eddie) Dong <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
diff --git a/drivers/kvm/ioapic.c b/drivers/kvm/ioapic.c
index 7c5a6ea..6c734db 100644
--- a/drivers/kvm/
I seem to be having the same problem as Aurelien Jarno, but with different
results.
http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.emulators.kvm.devel/4601/focus=4614
I have a Windows XP guest on the Ubuntu Feisty 64 kernel 2.6.20-16-generic
(not using the distro modules, but the ones from 29 or 31).
Kvm-28
Hi,
Just compiled kvm-31 and found some strange things.
My system uses kernel-2.6.21-gentoo-r4 i386. But after kvm-31 is
installed, I found /usr/local/kvm-31/bin/qemu-system-x86_64 instead of
/usr/local/kvm-31/bin/qemu for 32 bit system.
Since there is no option for choosing what CPU arch to us
On 7/19/07, Avi Kivity <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Changes from kvm-29:
[...]
> - revert ide enable changes that caused an I/O regression
Not really. Dave is seeing the regression when IDE ports are enabled
and KVM BIOS does enable them.
Reverting the patch allows running another BIOS (e.g. QEMU
On Thu, Jul 19, 2007 at 04:38:09PM +0300, Avi Kivity wrote:
> Looking at two random servers here and a desktop, interrupts are
> unshared except for usb. A laptop was not so lucky. So "no chance" is
> a bit extreme.
>
> I agree it's far from optimal, but it is less limited than you imply.
Wel
This removes the requirement for callers to get_cpu() to check in simple
cases. i386 and x86_64 already received a similar treatment.
Signed-off-by: Avi Kivity <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
---
arch/powerpc/kernel/smp.c |7 ++-
1 files changed, 6 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
diff --git a/arch/po
This removes the requirement for callers to get_cpu() to check in simple
cases. i386 and x86_64 already received a similar treatment.
Signed-off-by: Avi Kivity <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
---
arch/ia64/kernel/smp.c |8 +---
1 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/arch/ia64
kvm-30 broke the external module for older kernels, so here's the fix.
Changes from kvm-30:
- a few cleanups that somehow evaded kvm-30 (Jeff Dike, Rusty Russell)
- allow the external module to compile on older kernels.
Notes:
If you use the modules from kvm-31, you can use any version of Lin
Adrian Lambeck wrote:
> Hello everybody,
> I reported compilation problems on linux-2.6.21.4 last week with kvm-29.
> These problems do not
> occure with kvm-30. Instead the messages belo are now shown during
> compilation which make kvm unusable to me :-(.
>
> Thanks for any solutions to this is
Hello everybody,
I reported compilation problems on linux-2.6.21.4 last week with kvm-29.
These problems do not
occure with kvm-30. Instead the messages belo are now shown during
compilation which make kvm unusable to me :-(.
Thanks for any solutions to this issue!
Dong, Eddie wrote:
> Avi Kivity wrote:
>
>> Dong, Eddie wrote:
>>
>>> When thinking about live migration support for in kernel irqchip, one
>>> question comes out which need to be solved first:
>>> Do we need to support live migration among user level irqchip and
>>> kernel level?
>>>
Avi Kivity wrote:
> Dong, Eddie wrote:
>> When thinking about live migration support for in kernel irqchip, one
>> question comes out which need to be solved first:
>> Do we need to support live migration among user level irqchip and
>> kernel level?
>
> Yes.
>
>> If the answer is yes, kernel lev
Dong, Eddie wrote:
> When thinking about live migration support for in kernel irqchip, one
> question comes out which need to be solved first:
> Do we need to support live migration among user level irqchip and kernel
> level?
Yes.
> If the answer is yes, kernel level irqchip must keep same stat
When thinking about live migration support for in kernel irqchip, one
question comes out which need to be solved first:
Do we need to support live migration among user level irqchip and kernel
level? If the answer is yes, kernel level irqchip must keep same state
with user level, i.e. if Qemu chang
Lennart Sorensen wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 19, 2007 at 12:23:24PM +0300, Avi Kivity wrote:
>
>> No, it means disallowing pci devices that use shared irqs, and allowing
>> pci devices that use non-shared irqs.
>>
>
> Most machiens I see today have almost no chance of having PCI devices
> without
On Thu, Jul 19, 2007 at 12:23:24PM +0300, Avi Kivity wrote:
> No, it means disallowing pci devices that use shared irqs, and allowing
> pci devices that use non-shared irqs.
Most machiens I see today have almost no chance of having PCI devices
without shared IRQs. This probably means any impleme
This kvm release introduces guest smp. I've tested 4-way Linux (64-bit
and 32-bit) and 2-way Windows XP. A kernel build on 2-way 64-bit Linux
is 40% faster that on a uniprocessor guest. Expect performance to
improve as the in-kernel apic work is merged and as we tune kvm for smp.
Changes fro
Alessandro Sardo wrote:
> Hello list,
>
> I am trying to install Windows Server 2003 using KVM-29, but getting
> kernel panics every time.
>
> Some notes:
>
> * CPU model: 2 x Dual-Core AMD Opteron Processor 2210
> * KVM versions: KVM-29
> * Host: RHEL5 x86_64, kernel 2.6.18-8.1.8.el5
> * Guest: Wi
Hello list,
I am trying to install Windows Server 2003 using KVM-29, but getting
kernel panics every time.
Some notes:
* CPU model: 2 x Dual-Core AMD Opteron Processor 2210
* KVM versions: KVM-29
* Host: RHEL5 x86_64, kernel 2.6.18-8.1.8.el5
* Guest: Windows Server 2003 Standard edition
* the pr
Currently, CONFIG_X86_CMPXCHG64 both enables boot-time checking of
the cmpxchg64b feature and enables compilation of the set_64bit() family.
Since the option is dependent on PAE, and since KVM depends on set_64bit(),
this effectively disables KVM on i386 nopae.
Simplify by removing the config opti
Linus,
Please pull from the git repository at:
git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/avi/kvm.git for-linus
to get the following changes:
Avi Kivity (3):
KVM: MMU: Store nx bit for large page shadows
KVM: Fix memory slot management functions for guest smp
KVM: x86 emu
Lennart Sorensen wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 18, 2007 at 07:46:13PM +0300, Avi Kivity wrote:
>
>> IMO the only reasonable solution is to disallow interrupt forwarding
>> with shared irqs. If someone later comes up with a bright idea, we can
>> implement it. Otherwise the problem will solve itself wit
Paul Turner wrote:
> here's an updated version that instead takes kvm_lock and leaves the
> svm stuff in the relevant header file for now. unfortunately we still
> need the includes since gcc is braindead and can't compile untyped
> [0]-size arrays properly, the only two ways i can see to fix t
Dong, Eddie wrote:
> Rename KVM_CREATE_PIC to KVM_CREATE_IRQCHIP
> KVM_CAP_PIC to KVM_PIC_IRQCHIP since now it is not only PIC.
>
>
Applied & pushed both, thanks.
--
error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function
On 7/19/07, Avi Kivity <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Nguyen Anh Quynh wrote:
> > Currently, when handling hardware breakpoints, we always set values
> > for all the 4 hardware debug registers, regardless it is needed or
> > not. This patch fixes the bug.
>
> Why is this a problem? Only enabled brea
Nguyen Anh Quynh wrote:
> Currently, when handling hardware breakpoints, we always set values
> for all the 4 hardware debug registers, regardless it is needed or
> not. This patch fixes the bug.
Why is this a problem? Only enabled breakpoints are programmed into dr7.
> @@ -1519,12 +1522,18 @@ s
Anthony Liguori wrote:
> Paul Turner wrote:
>
>> + struct vmcs *vmcs;
>>
>>> + struct kvm_vcpu vcpu;
>>>
>>>
>> In this approach you might as well embed that at the start so that the
>> arch independent code can still allocate/free, that or move the memory
>>
Paul Turner wrote:
> On 7/18/07, Anthony Liguori <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> Paul Turner wrote:
>>
>>> I mentioned that as a possible solution in the other thread. The
>>> memorystructure gets a little uglier in that case since you have to
>>> hang the relevant vcpu off kvm_struct, in
Anthony Liguori wrote:
> Paul Turner wrote:
>
>> From: Paul Turner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>>
>> Since gcc can't handle [0]-sized arrays without type information we have
>> to use a generic type and then cast to remove arch dependencies from the
>> vcpu struct; this patch moves the structures (and
Currently, when handling hardware breakpoints, we always set values
for all the 4 hardware debug registers, regardless it is needed or
not. This patch fixes the bug.
Signed-off-by: Nguyen Anh Quynh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
diff --git a/drivers/kvm/kvm.h b/drivers/kvm/kvm.h
index 7bdffe6..c6187c8 10064
33 matches
Mail list logo
