Andrzej,
implemented the patch, works ok even if I removed the notsc parameter
from the kernel parameter line. I did some tests with the systems,
compiled quite some code - works great. I didn't make any performance
tests to compare the solutins - but it looks ok preformace wise.
(This is a 64bit
andrzej zaborowski wrote:
> On 19/04/07, Werner Dittmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Andrzej,
>>
>> the guest Linux system reported some AMD CPU type (can't remember
>> which one) which is not in my system. Now when the guest Linux starts
>> is correctly reports: CPU 0 AMD X2 4200+
>
> That
On 19/04/07, Werner Dittmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Andrzej,
the guest Linux system reported some AMD CPU type (can't remember
which one) which is not in my system. Now when the guest Linux starts
is correctly reports: CPU 0 AMD X2 4200+
That's a deficiency of the kqemu approach and i
Andrzej,
the guest Linux system reported some AMD CPU type (can't remember
which one) which is not in my system. Now when the guest Linux starts
is correctly reports: CPU 0 AMD X2 4200+
Regards,
Werner
andrzej zaborowski wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 18/04/07, Werner Dittmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wro
Hi,
On 18/04/07, Werner Dittmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Andrzej,
just another remark: after setting the kernel parameter to "notsc"
the kernel now detects the CPU correctly. Without this setting the
CPU detetion was wrong (displays the wrong CPU type, frequency, etc).
Are there any know sid
Andrzej,
just another remark: after setting the kernel parameter to "notsc"
the kernel now detects the CPU correctly. Without this setting the
CPU detetion was wrong (displays the wrong CPU type, frequency, etc).
Are there any know side-effects if notsc (no time stamp counter) is
set?
Regards,
We
Andrzej,
setting "notsc" makes the difference (yesterday I forgot to start
lilo after modifying /etc/lilo.conf to include notsc"). Now it
work even with -kernel-kqemu. Not fully tested though, but much
better than before.
Thanks,
Werner
andrzej zaborowski wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 17/04/07, Werner D
Hi,
On 17/04/07, Werner Dittmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
andrzej zaborowski wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 16/04/07, Werner Dittmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> During several tests with Qemu / Kqemu it seems that Qemu
>> has problems with x86_64 host systems. My system is an
>> AMD 64 X2 (Dual Core),
andrzej zaborowski wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 16/04/07, Werner Dittmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> During several tests with Qemu / Kqemu it seems that Qemu
>> has problems with x86_64 host systems. My system is an
>> AMD 64 X2 (Dual Core), running openSUSE 10.2, 2GB memory.
>>
Indeed it is a dual CPU
On Mon, Apr 16, 2007 at 08:47:07AM +0200, Werner Dittmann wrote:
> My general thought about the problem: running 32bit code
> on a 64bit host with similar architecture as this is the case
> of x86 / x86_64 could easily result in problems with signedness,
> sign bit extension, different pointer/word
Hi,
On 16/04/07, Werner Dittmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
During several tests with Qemu / Kqemu it seems that Qemu
has problems with x86_64 host systems. My system is an
AMD 64 X2 (Dual Core), running openSUSE 10.2, 2GB memory.
Various versions of Qemu/Kqemu available and under test:
0.8.2,
During several tests with Qemu / Kqemu it seems that Qemu
has problems with x86_64 host systems. My system is an
AMD 64 X2 (Dual Core), running openSUSE 10.2, 2GB memory.
Various versions of Qemu/Kqemu available and under test:
0.8.2, 0.9.0, and CVS. Kqemu 1.3.0pre9, 1.3.0pre11
When building Qemu
12 matches
Mail list logo
