On Sun, Apr 11, 2010 at 03:33:32PM +0300, Avi Kivity wrote:
> MAXPHYADDR is derived from cpuid 0x8008, but when that isn't present, we
> get some random value.
>
> Fix by checking first that cpuid 0x8008 is supported.
>
> Pekka Enberg
> Signed-off-by: Avi Kivity
Applied, thanks.
--
To
Avi Kivity wrote:
OK, then it's a bug of my own doing and we don't need to do anything
in the kernel.
I think the patch is nevertheless correct, not sure why it worked so far.
Yes, agreed. I'm guessing most 64-bit CPUs support 0x8008 and qemu
does the right thing so the bug doesn't trig
On 04/11/2010 04:53 PM, Pekka Enberg wrote:
Avi Kivity wrote:
On 04/11/2010 04:45 PM, Pekka Enberg wrote:
Pekka Enberg wrote:
Avi Kivity wrote:
Hmm, doesn't seem to work here. I still that triple fault in guest.
Can you add a printk to see what value is returned and why?
Argh, it's a off-
Avi Kivity wrote:
On 04/11/2010 04:45 PM, Pekka Enberg wrote:
Pekka Enberg wrote:
Avi Kivity wrote:
Hmm, doesn't seem to work here. I still that triple fault in guest.
Can you add a printk to see what value is returned and why?
Argh, it's a off-by one bug in my userspace tool... So the CPU
On 04/11/2010 04:45 PM, Pekka Enberg wrote:
Pekka Enberg wrote:
Avi Kivity wrote:
Hmm, doesn't seem to work here. I still that triple fault in guest.
Can you add a printk to see what value is returned and why?
Argh, it's a off-by one bug in my userspace tool... So the CPU really
does suppo
Pekka Enberg wrote:
Avi Kivity wrote:
Hmm, doesn't seem to work here. I still that triple fault in guest.
Can you add a printk to see what value is returned and why?
Argh, it's a off-by one bug in my userspace tool... So the CPU really
does support 0x8008 and I'm just an idiot. :-)
So
Avi Kivity wrote:
Hmm, doesn't seem to work here. I still that triple fault in guest.
Can you add a printk to see what value is returned and why?
Argh, it's a off-by one bug in my userspace tool... So the CPU really
does support 0x8008 and I'm just an idiot. :-)
On 04/11/2010 04:32 PM, Pekka Enberg wrote:
Avi Kivity wrote:
MAXPHYADDR is derived from cpuid 0x8008, but when that isn't
present, we
get some random value.
Fix by checking first that cpuid 0x8008 is supported.
Pekka Enberg
Signed-off-by: Avi Kivity
---
arch/x86/kvm/x86.c |4 +
Avi Kivity wrote:
MAXPHYADDR is derived from cpuid 0x8008, but when that isn't present, we
get some random value.
Fix by checking first that cpuid 0x8008 is supported.
Pekka Enberg
Signed-off-by: Avi Kivity
---
arch/x86/kvm/x86.c |4
1 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 0 delet
On 04/11/2010 03:33 PM, Avi Kivity wrote:
MAXPHYADDR is derived from cpuid 0x8008, but when that isn't present, we
get some random value.
Fix by checking first that cpuid 0x8008 is supported.
Pekka Enberg
^ += Reported-by: (looking forward to Tested-by: too)
--
error compiling co
MAXPHYADDR is derived from cpuid 0x8008, but when that isn't present, we
get some random value.
Fix by checking first that cpuid 0x8008 is supported.
Pekka Enberg
Signed-off-by: Avi Kivity
---
arch/x86/kvm/x86.c |4
1 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
diff --git
11 matches
Mail list logo
