On Mon, Sep 30, 2013 at 01:13:34PM -0300, Eduardo Habkost wrote:
> I have added it to my TODO-list. :-)
Cool, thanks. Let me know if I can test stuff and help out somehow.
> >
> > Also, there's another aspect, while we're here: now that QEMU emulates
> > MOVBE with TCG too, how do we specify on
On Mon, Sep 30, 2013 at 11:05:10AM +0200, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> I think there are already patches on the list to do that, as part of
> the NUMA memory binding series from Wanlong Gao.
Yeah: https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel/2013-09/msg02833.html
Although I don't see from it how the s
Btw,
while I got your attention, on a not-really related topic: how do we
feel about adding support for specifying a non-contiguous set of cpus
for a numa node in qemu with the -numa option? I.e., like this, for
example:
x86_64-softmmu/qemu-system-x86_64 -smp 8 -numa node,nodeid=0,cpus=0\;2\;4-5
On Fri, Sep 27, 2013 at 11:21:34AM -0300, Eduardo Habkost wrote:
> The problem here is that "requested_features" doesn't include just
> the explicit "+flag" flags, but any flag included in the CPU model
> definition. See the "-cpu n270" example below.
Oh, you mean if requested_features would conta
On Thu, Sep 26, 2013 at 04:20:59PM -0300, Eduardo Habkost wrote:
> Please point me to the code that does this, because I don't see it on
> patch 6/6.
@@ -1850,7 +1850,14 @@ static void filter_features_for_kvm(X86CPU *cpu)
wi->cpuid_ecx,
On Thu, Sep 26, 2013 at 11:19:15AM -0300, Eduardo Habkost wrote:
> Then we may have a problem: some CPU models already have "movbe"
> included (e.g. Haswell), and patch 6/6 will make "-cpu Haswell" get
> movbe enabled even if it is being emulated.
Huh? HSW has MOVBE so we won't #UD on it and MOVBE
