On Tue, 2007-09-18 at 16:25 -0500, Ryan Harper wrote: > * Nakajima, Jun <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2007-09-18 16:22]: > > Anthony Liguori wrote: > > > Ryan Harper wrote: > > > > Playing around with running VMware-server within a KVM guest and > > noticed > > > > that whenever we launch a VM within the guest, KVM reports a GP > > fault in > > > > set_cr3. Removing the fault injection (raised for attempting to set > > > > reserved bits) for the non-pae case allows memtest to boot and run > > > > within VMWare Server, running in a KVM Linux guest. > > > > > > > > This same test (Linux, VMware-server, booting/running memtest iso) > > works > > > > fine on bare-metal. Thoughts? > > > > > > > > > > Setting reserved bits is different from setting MBZ bits since the > > > behaviors undefined. If something as common as VMware is depending on > > > being able to set a reserved bit then perhaps the right thing to do > > from > > > KVM's perspective is to let it. > > > > > > I'm curious if Zach or Jun have any comments about the right thing to > > do > > > here. > > > > > > > As long as the guest is protected mode (unlike the long mode), the Intel > > spec does _not_ say that reserved bits checking is enforced for CR3. As > > far as I looked at the AMD spec, looks like #GP is caused even in > > protected mode... Does the test work for AMD systems? > > I ran my test on an AMD host.
We have a test which verifies #GP is not caused by setting the bits on either AMD or Intel chips. "Stray" bits can get turned on in some cases when switching between 64-bit, PAE and non-PAE address modes. Were you testing on a 64-bit host kernel? Zach ------------------------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2005. http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/ _______________________________________________ kvm-devel mailing list kvm-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/kvm-devel
