Anthony Liguori wrote:
>
> Keep in mind, this is not big real mode. The gfxboot code here was
> actually rewritten to not use big real mode so that it worked with
> Xen. It works with Xen because Xen uses vm86 mode within the host
> whereas KVM uses vm86 mode in the guest's VT context.
I don'
Alexander Graf wrote:
> Real mode segments are mere offsets. They get lshifted by 4 (as far as
> I remember) and just added to the offset. SS is on some value here
>
Yes, this is correct.
> 0x00046e60: and$0x,%esp
> 0x00046e66: shl$0x4,%eax
> 0x00046e6
On Feb 18, 2008, at 12:46 PM, Andi Kleen wrote:
> Alexander Graf <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>>
>> As everything except gfxboot works, we can simply change gfxboot in
>> runtime to use a different value. Unfortunately the mov instruction,
>> used to read the SS register is only 2 bytes long, so t
Alexander Graf <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> As everything except gfxboot works, we can simply change gfxboot in
> runtime to use a different value. Unfortunately the mov instruction,
> used to read the SS register is only 2 bytes long, so there is no way to
> binary patch the mov to something th
On Feb 18, 2008, at 10:34 AM, Alexander Graf wrote:
>
> On Feb 18, 2008, at 10:17 AM, Guillaume Thouvenin wrote:
>
>> On Sat, 16 Feb 2008 14:34:09 +0100
>> Alexander Graf <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
Whenever the register state becomes consistent with VT again.
vmx_set_segment() looks
On Feb 18, 2008, at 10:17 AM, Guillaume Thouvenin wrote:
> On Sat, 16 Feb 2008 14:34:09 +0100
> Alexander Graf <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>>> Whenever the register state becomes consistent with VT again.
>>> vmx_set_segment() looks like the right point for turning it off.
>>
>> Sounds good. As
On Sat, 16 Feb 2008 14:34:09 +0100
Alexander Graf <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Whenever the register state becomes consistent with VT again.
> > vmx_set_segment() looks like the right point for turning it off.
>
> Sounds good. As basically the only problem we have are the sanity
> checks d
Alexander Graf wrote:
>
> Emulating all of the real mode shouldn't be too much of a problem on
> the performance side. I wouldn't be surprised if the vmenter/exits
> take about as much time as the emulation overhead.
>
For the bootstrap process emulation is good enough, since the process is
sho
On Feb 16, 2008, at 10:06 AM, Avi Kivity wrote:
> Alexander Graf wrote:
>>>
>>> While enabling gfxboot over vmx is very desirable, I'd like to avoid
>>> guest-specific hacks. IMO the correct fix is to set a
>>> "non_vt_friendly"
>>> flag when switching from real mode to protected mode, then c
Alexander Graf wrote:
>>
>> While enabling gfxboot over vmx is very desirable, I'd like to avoid
>> guest-specific hacks. IMO the correct fix is to set a
>> "non_vt_friendly"
>> flag when switching from real mode to protected mode, then continue
>> emulation, re-computing the flag after every in
On Fri, 15 Feb 2008, Alexander Graf wrote:
> On Feb 15, 2008, at 3:56 PM, Anthony Liguori wrote:
>
> >Have you tried SLES-9 or openSUSE variants of the same age? The ss issue in
> >gfxboot is only something recently introduced. Prior to that, gfxboot used
> >big real mode so your patch wouldn't
On Feb 15, 2008, at 3:56 PM, Anthony Liguori wrote:
> Alexander Graf wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> this issue has already been talked about previously. Gfxboot on VMX
>> is
>> broken, because it reads SS after switching from real to protected
>> mode,
>> where SS contains an invalid value, which VMX do
Alexander Graf wrote:
> Hi,
>
> this issue has already been talked about previously. Gfxboot on VMX is
> broken, because it reads SS after switching from real to protected mode,
> where SS contains an invalid value, which VMX does not allow.
> As far as I know, gfxboot is the only application that
On Feb 15, 2008, at 2:47 PM, Avi Kivity wrote:
> Alexander Graf wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> this issue has already been talked about previously. Gfxboot on VMX
>> is
>> broken, because it reads SS after switching from real to protected
>> mode,
>> where SS contains an invalid value, which VMX does no
Alexander Graf wrote:
> Hi,
>
> this issue has already been talked about previously. Gfxboot on VMX is
> broken, because it reads SS after switching from real to protected mode,
> where SS contains an invalid value, which VMX does not allow.
> As far as I know, gfxboot is the only application that
Hi,
this issue has already been talked about previously. Gfxboot on VMX is
broken, because it reads SS after switching from real to protected mode,
where SS contains an invalid value, which VMX does not allow.
As far as I know, gfxboot is the only application that suffers from this
issue.
The curr
16 matches
Mail list logo
