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 Sat, Sep 28, 2013 at 12:49:04PM +0200, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> 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
On Sat, Sep 28, 2013 at 12:49:04PM +0200, Borislav Petkov wrote:
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
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 the
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
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 contain a
On Thu, Sep 26, 2013 at 10:32:06PM +0200, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> 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)
On Thu, Sep 26, 2013 at 10:32:06PM +0200, Borislav Petkov wrote:
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)
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)
On Thu, Sep 26, 2013 at 08:55:24PM +0200, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> 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
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
On Tue, Sep 24, 2013 at 01:04:14PM +0300, Gleb Natapov wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 24, 2013 at 11:57:00AM +0200, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> > On Mon, September 23, 2013 6:28 pm, Eduardo Habkost wrote:
> > > On Sun, Sep 22, 2013 at 04:44:50PM +0200, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> > >> From: Borislav Petkov
> >
On Tue, Sep 24, 2013 at 01:04:14PM +0300, Gleb Natapov wrote:
On Tue, Sep 24, 2013 at 11:57:00AM +0200, Borislav Petkov wrote:
On Mon, September 23, 2013 6:28 pm, Eduardo Habkost wrote:
On Sun, Sep 22, 2013 at 04:44:50PM +0200, Borislav Petkov wrote:
From: Borislav Petkov b...@suse.de
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 will
On Thu, Sep 26, 2013 at 08:55:24PM +0200, Borislav Petkov wrote:
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
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 Tue, Sep 24, 2013 at 11:57:00AM +0200, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> On Mon, September 23, 2013 6:28 pm, Eduardo Habkost wrote:
> > On Sun, Sep 22, 2013 at 04:44:50PM +0200, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> >> From: Borislav Petkov
> >>
> >> Add a kvm ioctl which states which system functionality kvm
On Mon, September 23, 2013 6:28 pm, Eduardo Habkost wrote:
> On Sun, Sep 22, 2013 at 04:44:50PM +0200, Borislav Petkov wrote:
>> From: Borislav Petkov
>>
>> Add a kvm ioctl which states which system functionality kvm emulates.
>> The format used is that of CPUID and we return the corresponding
On Mon, September 23, 2013 6:28 pm, Eduardo Habkost wrote:
On Sun, Sep 22, 2013 at 04:44:50PM +0200, Borislav Petkov wrote:
From: Borislav Petkov b...@suse.de
Add a kvm ioctl which states which system functionality kvm emulates.
The format used is that of CPUID and we return the corresponding
On Tue, Sep 24, 2013 at 11:57:00AM +0200, Borislav Petkov wrote:
On Mon, September 23, 2013 6:28 pm, Eduardo Habkost wrote:
On Sun, Sep 22, 2013 at 04:44:50PM +0200, Borislav Petkov wrote:
From: Borislav Petkov b...@suse.de
Add a kvm ioctl which states which system functionality kvm
On Sun, Sep 22, 2013 at 04:44:50PM +0200, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> From: Borislav Petkov
>
> Add a kvm ioctl which states which system functionality kvm emulates.
> The format used is that of CPUID and we return the corresponding CPUID
> bits set for which we do emulate functionality.
Let me
On Sun, Sep 22, 2013 at 04:44:50PM +0200, Borislav Petkov wrote:
From: Borislav Petkov b...@suse.de
Add a kvm ioctl which states which system functionality kvm emulates.
The format used is that of CPUID and we return the corresponding CPUID
bits set for which we do emulate functionality.
From: Borislav Petkov
Add a kvm ioctl which states which system functionality kvm emulates.
The format used is that of CPUID and we return the corresponding CPUID
bits set for which we do emulate functionality.
Make sure ->padding is being passed on clean from userspace so that we
can use it
From: Borislav Petkov b...@suse.de
Add a kvm ioctl which states which system functionality kvm emulates.
The format used is that of CPUID and we return the corresponding CPUID
bits set for which we do emulate functionality.
Make sure -padding is being passed on clean from userspace so that we
24 matches
Mail list logo
