On 06/18/2009 12:56 AM, Alexander Graf wrote:
I can test suspend/resume for you if you don't have a friendly
machine. I have a personal interest in keeping it working :)
Thinking about it again - there's only the atomic dec_and_test vs.
read thing and the suspend test missing.
Is the atomi
On 16.06.2009, at 17:13, Avi Kivity wrote:
On 06/16/2009 05:08 PM, Alexander Graf wrote:
Please tell me you tested suspend/resume with/without VMs and cpu
hotunplug/hotplug.
I tested cpu hotplugging. On the last round I tested suspend/
resume, but
this time I couldn't because my machine c
On 06/16/2009 05:08 PM, Alexander Graf wrote:
Please tell me you tested suspend/resume with/without VMs and cpu
hotunplug/hotplug.
I tested cpu hotplugging. On the last round I tested suspend/resume, but
this time I couldn't because my machine can't do suspend :-(.
So I'll try hard and fi
Avi Kivity wrote:
> On 06/15/2009 02:30 PM, Alexander Graf wrote:
>> X86 CPUs need to have some magic happening to enable the virtualization
>> extensions on them. This magic can result in unpleasant results for
>> users, like blocking other VMMs from working (vmx) or using invalid TLB
>> entries (
On 06/15/2009 03:17 PM, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
On Mon, Jun 15, 2009 at 01:30:05PM +0200, Alexander Graf wrote:
X86 CPUs need to have some magic happening to enable the virtualization
extensions on them. This magic can result in unpleasant results for
users, like blocking other VMMs from wo
On 06/15/2009 02:30 PM, Alexander Graf wrote:
X86 CPUs need to have some magic happening to enable the virtualization
extensions on them. This magic can result in unpleasant results for
users, like blocking other VMMs from working (vmx) or using invalid TLB
entries (svm).
Currently KVM activates
On Mon, Jun 15, 2009 at 02:25:01PM +0200, Alexander Graf wrote:
> I don't want to fight political battles here.
So stop that crap.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kvm" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.or
On 15.06.2009, at 14:17, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
On Mon, Jun 15, 2009 at 01:30:05PM +0200, Alexander Graf wrote:
X86 CPUs need to have some magic happening to enable the
virtualization
extensions on them. This magic can result in unpleasant results for
users, like blocking other VMMs from w
On Mon, Jun 15, 2009 at 01:30:05PM +0200, Alexander Graf wrote:
> X86 CPUs need to have some magic happening to enable the virtualization
> extensions on them. This magic can result in unpleasant results for
> users, like blocking other VMMs from working (vmx) or using invalid TLB
> entries (svm).
X86 CPUs need to have some magic happening to enable the virtualization
extensions on them. This magic can result in unpleasant results for
users, like blocking other VMMs from working (vmx) or using invalid TLB
entries (svm).
Currently KVM activates virtualization when the respective kernel modul
Christian Borntraeger wrote:
When you are at it, could move these printk to the arches that atually
enable/disable virtualization?
For example you could do something like
if (callback) {
printk "...";
callback();
}
And then you could remove kvm_arch_hardware_enable/disable fr
Am Mittwoch, 5. November 2008 schrieb Alexander Graf:
> printk(KERN_INFO "kvm: disabling virtualization on CPU%d\n",
> cpu);
[...]
> printk(KERN_INFO "kvm: disabling virtualization on CPU%d\n",
> cpu);
[...]
> print
Avi Kivity wrote:
> Alexander Graf wrote:
[snip]
static int kvm_resume(struct sys_device *dev)
{
-hardware_enable(NULL);
+if (atomic_read(&kvm_usage_count))
+hardware_enable(NULL);
return 0;
}
>>> Move the test to hardware_e
Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 05, 2008 at 09:48:16AM +0100, Alexander Graf wrote:
>
>> X86 CPUs need to have some magic happening to enable the virtualization
>> extensions on them. This magic can result in unpleasant results for
>> users, like blocking other VMMs from working (vmx) or
On Wed, Nov 05, 2008 at 09:48:16AM +0100, Alexander Graf wrote:
> X86 CPUs need to have some magic happening to enable the virtualization
> extensions on them. This magic can result in unpleasant results for
> users, like blocking other VMMs from working (vmx) or using invalid TLB
> entries (svm).
Zhang, Xiantao wrote:
> Alexander Graf wrote:
>
>> X86 CPUs need to have some magic happening to enable the
>> virtualization
>> extensions on them. This magic can result in unpleasant results for
>> users, like blocking other VMMs from working (vmx) or using invalid
>> TLB
>> entries (svm).
>
Avi Kivity wrote:
> Alexander Graf wrote:
>
>
>
>>> We'll be in a nice fix if we can only enable virtualization on some
>>> processors; that's the reason hardware_enable() was originally
>>> specified as returning void.
>>>
>>> I don't see an easy way out, but it's hardly a likely event.
>>>
Alexander Graf wrote:
> X86 CPUs need to have some magic happening to enable the
> virtualization
> extensions on them. This magic can result in unpleasant results for
> users, like blocking other VMMs from working (vmx) or using invalid
> TLB
> entries (svm).
>
> Currently KVM activates virtual
Alexander Graf wrote:
We'll be in a nice fix if we can only enable virtualization on some
processors; that's the reason hardware_enable() was originally
specified as returning void.
I don't see an easy way out, but it's hardly a likely event.
I don't think there's any way we can circu
Avi Kivity wrote:
> Alexander Graf wrote:
>> X86 CPUs need to have some magic happening to enable the virtualization
>> extensions on them. This magic can result in unpleasant results for
>> users, like blocking other VMMs from working (vmx) or using invalid TLB
>> entries (svm).
>>
>> Currently KV
Alexander Graf wrote:
X86 CPUs need to have some magic happening to enable the virtualization
extensions on them. This magic can result in unpleasant results for
users, like blocking other VMMs from working (vmx) or using invalid TLB
entries (svm).
Currently KVM activates virtualization when the
X86 CPUs need to have some magic happening to enable the virtualization
extensions on them. This magic can result in unpleasant results for
users, like blocking other VMMs from working (vmx) or using invalid TLB
entries (svm).
Currently KVM activates virtualization when the respective kernel modul
22 matches
Mail list logo
