Gleb Natapov wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 07, 2011 at 04:39:58PM -0500, Anthony Liguori wrote:
> > On 04/07/2011 01:51 PM, Gleb Natapov wrote:
> > >NMI does not have to generate crash dump on every guest we support.
> > >Actually even for windows guest it does not generate one without
> > >tweaking registr
Blue Swirl wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 8, 2011 at 9:04 AM, Gleb Natapov wrote:
> > On Thu, Apr 07, 2011 at 04:41:03PM -0500, Anthony Liguori wrote:
> >> On 04/07/2011 02:17 PM, Gleb Natapov wrote:
> >> >On Thu, Apr 07, 2011 at 10:04:00PM +0300, Blue Swirl wrote:
> >> >>On Thu, Apr 7, 2011 at 9:51 PM, Gle
On Wed, 20 Apr 2011 09:53:56 +0800
Lai Jiangshan wrote:
> On 04/04/2011 09:09 PM, Anthony Liguori wrote:
> > On 04/04/2011 07:19 AM, Markus Armbruster wrote:
> >> [Note cc: Anthony]
> >>
> >> "Daniel P. Berrange" writes:
> >>
> >>> On Mon, Mar 07, 2011 at 05:46:28PM +0800, Lai Jiangshan wrote:
>
On 04/20/2011 09:53 AM, Lai Jiangshan wrote:
> On 04/04/2011 09:09 PM, Anthony Liguori wrote:
>> On 04/04/2011 07:19 AM, Markus Armbruster wrote:
>>> [Note cc: Anthony]
>>>
>>> "Daniel P. Berrange" writes:
>>>
On Mon, Mar 07, 2011 at 05:46:28PM +0800, Lai Jiangshan wrote:
> From: Lai Jian
On 04/04/2011 09:09 PM, Anthony Liguori wrote:
> On 04/04/2011 07:19 AM, Markus Armbruster wrote:
>> [Note cc: Anthony]
>>
>> "Daniel P. Berrange" writes:
>>
>>> On Mon, Mar 07, 2011 at 05:46:28PM +0800, Lai Jiangshan wrote:
From: Lai Jiangshan
Date: Mon, 7 Mar 2011 17:05:15 +0800
S
On Thu, Apr 14, 2011 at 12:55 PM, Daniel P. Berrange
wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 13, 2011 at 10:56:21PM +0300, Blue Swirl wrote:
>> On Wed, Apr 13, 2011 at 4:08 PM, Luiz Capitulino
>> wrote:
>> > On Tue, 12 Apr 2011 21:31:18 +0300
>> > Blue Swirl wrote:
>> >
>> >> On Tue, Apr 12, 2011 at 10:52 AM, Avi
On Wed, Apr 13, 2011 at 10:56:21PM +0300, Blue Swirl wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 13, 2011 at 4:08 PM, Luiz Capitulino
> wrote:
> > On Tue, 12 Apr 2011 21:31:18 +0300
> > Blue Swirl wrote:
> >
> >> On Tue, Apr 12, 2011 at 10:52 AM, Avi Kivity wrote:
> >> > On 04/11/2011 08:15 PM, Blue Swirl wrote:
> >>
Blue Swirl writes:
> On Wed, Apr 13, 2011 at 4:08 PM, Luiz Capitulino
> wrote:
>> On Tue, 12 Apr 2011 21:31:18 +0300
>> Blue Swirl wrote:
>>
>>> On Tue, Apr 12, 2011 at 10:52 AM, Avi Kivity wrote:
>>> > On 04/11/2011 08:15 PM, Blue Swirl wrote:
>>> >>
>>> >> On Mon, Apr 11, 2011 at 10:01 AM,
On Wed, Apr 13, 2011 at 4:08 PM, Luiz Capitulino wrote:
> On Tue, 12 Apr 2011 21:31:18 +0300
> Blue Swirl wrote:
>
>> On Tue, Apr 12, 2011 at 10:52 AM, Avi Kivity wrote:
>> > On 04/11/2011 08:15 PM, Blue Swirl wrote:
>> >>
>> >> On Mon, Apr 11, 2011 at 10:01 AM, Markus Armbruster
>> >> wrote:
>
On Tue, 12 Apr 2011 21:31:18 +0300
Blue Swirl wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 12, 2011 at 10:52 AM, Avi Kivity wrote:
> > On 04/11/2011 08:15 PM, Blue Swirl wrote:
> >>
> >> On Mon, Apr 11, 2011 at 10:01 AM, Markus Armbruster
> >> wrote:
> >> > Avi Kivity writes:
> >> >
> >> >> On 04/08/2011 12:41 AM,
On Tue, Apr 12, 2011 at 10:52 AM, Avi Kivity wrote:
> On 04/11/2011 08:15 PM, Blue Swirl wrote:
>>
>> On Mon, Apr 11, 2011 at 10:01 AM, Markus Armbruster
>> wrote:
>> > Avi Kivity writes:
>> >
>> >> On 04/08/2011 12:41 AM, Anthony Liguori wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>> And it's a good thing to have, bu
On 04/11/2011 08:15 PM, Blue Swirl wrote:
On Mon, Apr 11, 2011 at 10:01 AM, Markus Armbruster wrote:
> Avi Kivity writes:
>
>> On 04/08/2011 12:41 AM, Anthony Liguori wrote:
>>>
>>> And it's a good thing to have, but exposing this as the only API to
>>> do something as simple as generating
On Mon, Apr 11, 2011 at 10:01 AM, Markus Armbruster wrote:
> Avi Kivity writes:
>
>> On 04/08/2011 12:41 AM, Anthony Liguori wrote:
>>>
>>> And it's a good thing to have, but exposing this as the only API to
>>> do something as simple as generating a guest crash dump is not the
>>> friendliest th
Avi Kivity writes:
> On 04/08/2011 12:41 AM, Anthony Liguori wrote:
>>
>> And it's a good thing to have, but exposing this as the only API to
>> do something as simple as generating a guest crash dump is not the
>> friendliest thing in the world to do to users.
>
> nmi is a fine name for somethin
On 04/08/2011 12:39 AM, Anthony Liguori wrote:
On 04/07/2011 01:51 PM, Gleb Natapov wrote:
NMI does not have to generate crash dump on every guest we support.
Actually even for windows guest it does not generate one without
tweaking registry. For all I know there is a guest that checks mail when
On 04/08/2011 12:41 AM, Anthony Liguori wrote:
And it's a good thing to have, but exposing this as the only API to do
something as simple as generating a guest crash dump is not the
friendliest thing in the world to do to users.
nmi is a fine name for something that corresponds to a real-lif
On Fri, Apr 8, 2011 at 10:32 PM, Anthony Liguori wrote:
> On 04/08/2011 02:17 PM, Blue Swirl wrote:
>>
>> On Fri, Apr 8, 2011 at 9:04 AM, Gleb Natapov wrote:
>>>
>>> On Thu, Apr 07, 2011 at 04:41:03PM -0500, Anthony Liguori wrote:
On 04/07/2011 02:17 PM, Gleb Natapov wrote:
>
>
On 04/08/2011 02:17 PM, Blue Swirl wrote:
On Fri, Apr 8, 2011 at 9:04 AM, Gleb Natapov wrote:
On Thu, Apr 07, 2011 at 04:41:03PM -0500, Anthony Liguori wrote:
On 04/07/2011 02:17 PM, Gleb Natapov wrote:
On Thu, Apr 07, 2011 at 10:04:00PM +0300, Blue Swirl wrote:
On Thu, Apr 7, 2011 at 9:51 P
On Fri, Apr 8, 2011 at 9:04 AM, Gleb Natapov wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 07, 2011 at 04:41:03PM -0500, Anthony Liguori wrote:
>> On 04/07/2011 02:17 PM, Gleb Natapov wrote:
>> >On Thu, Apr 07, 2011 at 10:04:00PM +0300, Blue Swirl wrote:
>> >>On Thu, Apr 7, 2011 at 9:51 PM, Gleb Natapov wrote:
>> >>
>> >
On Thu, Apr 07, 2011 at 04:41:03PM -0500, Anthony Liguori wrote:
> On 04/07/2011 02:17 PM, Gleb Natapov wrote:
> >On Thu, Apr 07, 2011 at 10:04:00PM +0300, Blue Swirl wrote:
> >>On Thu, Apr 7, 2011 at 9:51 PM, Gleb Natapov wrote:
> >>
> >>I'd prefer something more generic like these:
> >>raise /ap
On Thu, Apr 07, 2011 at 04:39:58PM -0500, Anthony Liguori wrote:
> On 04/07/2011 01:51 PM, Gleb Natapov wrote:
> >NMI does not have to generate crash dump on every guest we support.
> >Actually even for windows guest it does not generate one without
> >tweaking registry. For all I know there is a g
On 04/07/2011 02:17 PM, Gleb Natapov wrote:
On Thu, Apr 07, 2011 at 10:04:00PM +0300, Blue Swirl wrote:
On Thu, Apr 7, 2011 at 9:51 PM, Gleb Natapov wrote:
I'd prefer something more generic like these:
raise /apic@fee0:l1int
lower /i44FX-pcihost/e1000@03.0/pinD
The clumsier syntax shouldn
On 04/07/2011 01:51 PM, Gleb Natapov wrote:
NMI does not have to generate crash dump on every guest we support.
Actually even for windows guest it does not generate one without
tweaking registry. For all I know there is a guest that checks mail when
NMI arrives.
And for all we know, a guest can
On Thu, Apr 07, 2011 at 10:04:00PM +0300, Blue Swirl wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 7, 2011 at 9:51 PM, Gleb Natapov wrote:
> > On Thu, Apr 07, 2011 at 01:32:50PM -0500, Anthony Liguori wrote:
> >> On 04/07/2011 01:10 PM, Peter Maydell wrote:
> >> >On 6 April 2011 20:34, Anthony Liguori wrote:
> >> >>http:
On Thu, Apr 7, 2011 at 9:51 PM, Gleb Natapov wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 07, 2011 at 01:32:50PM -0500, Anthony Liguori wrote:
>> On 04/07/2011 01:10 PM, Peter Maydell wrote:
>> >On 6 April 2011 20:34, Anthony Liguori wrote:
>> >>http://publib.boulder.ibm.com/infocenter/lnxinfo/v3r0m0/index.jsp?topic=/li
On Thu, Apr 07, 2011 at 01:32:50PM -0500, Anthony Liguori wrote:
> On 04/07/2011 01:10 PM, Peter Maydell wrote:
> >On 6 April 2011 20:34, Anthony Liguori wrote:
> >>http://publib.boulder.ibm.com/infocenter/lnxinfo/v3r0m0/index.jsp?topic=/liaai/crashdump/liaaicrashdumpnmiipmi.htm
> >>
> >>If an OS
On 04/07/2011 01:10 PM, Peter Maydell wrote:
On 6 April 2011 20:34, Anthony Liguori wrote:
http://publib.boulder.ibm.com/infocenter/lnxinfo/v3r0m0/index.jsp?topic=/liaai/crashdump/liaaicrashdumpnmiipmi.htm
If an OS is totally hosed (spinning with interrupts disabled), and NMI can
be used to ge
On 6 April 2011 20:34, Anthony Liguori wrote:
> http://publib.boulder.ibm.com/infocenter/lnxinfo/v3r0m0/index.jsp?topic=/liaai/crashdump/liaaicrashdumpnmiipmi.htm
>
> If an OS is totally hosed (spinning with interrupts disabled), and NMI can
> be used to generate a crash dump.
>
> It's a debug fea
On 2011-04-06 21:34, Anthony Liguori wrote:
> On 04/06/2011 02:27 PM, Peter Maydell wrote:
>>> Right, but honestly speaking, I don't know how this works for other arches.
>>>
>>> So, the best thing to do is to have a general design that can be used
>>> by any architecture. Of course that we can als
On 04/06/2011 02:27 PM, Peter Maydell wrote:
Right, but honestly speaking, I don't know how this works for other arches.
So, the best thing to do is to have a general design that can be used
by any architecture. Of course that we can also add a new command later
if needed.
Well, I'm not sure "s
On 6 April 2011 20:00, Luiz Capitulino wrote:
> On Wed, 06 Apr 2011 20:17:47 +0200
> Jan Kiszka wrote:
>> HMP is currently x86-only, thus it's probably OK to model it after some
>> PC feature (though I don't know if there aren't NMI buttons with BP-only
>> wirings). But will the consolidate versi
On Wed, 06 Apr 2011 20:17:47 +0200
Jan Kiszka wrote:
> On 2011-04-06 20:08, Luiz Capitulino wrote:
> > On Wed, 06 Apr 2011 13:03:37 -0500
> > Anthony Liguori wrote:
> >
> >> On 04/06/2011 12:47 PM, Luiz Capitulino wrote:
> >>> On Mon, 04 Apr 2011 08:05:48 -0500
> >>> Anthony Liguori wrote:
> >
On 2011-04-06 20:08, Luiz Capitulino wrote:
> On Wed, 06 Apr 2011 13:03:37 -0500
> Anthony Liguori wrote:
>
>> On 04/06/2011 12:47 PM, Luiz Capitulino wrote:
>>> On Mon, 04 Apr 2011 08:05:48 -0500
>>> Anthony Liguori wrote:
>>>
On 04/04/2011 07:54 AM, Avi Kivity wrote:
> On 04/04/2011 0
On Wed, 06 Apr 2011 13:03:37 -0500
Anthony Liguori wrote:
> On 04/06/2011 12:47 PM, Luiz Capitulino wrote:
> > On Mon, 04 Apr 2011 08:05:48 -0500
> > Anthony Liguori wrote:
> >
> >> On 04/04/2011 07:54 AM, Avi Kivity wrote:
> >>> On 04/04/2011 01:59 PM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
> Interesti
On 04/06/2011 12:47 PM, Luiz Capitulino wrote:
On Mon, 04 Apr 2011 08:05:48 -0500
Anthony Liguori wrote:
On 04/04/2011 07:54 AM, Avi Kivity wrote:
On 04/04/2011 01:59 PM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
Interesting that with HMP you need to specify a single CPU index, but
with QMP it is injecting
On Mon, 04 Apr 2011 08:05:48 -0500
Anthony Liguori wrote:
> On 04/04/2011 07:54 AM, Avi Kivity wrote:
> > On 04/04/2011 01:59 PM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
> >> Interesting that with HMP you need to specify a single CPU index, but
> >> with QMP it is injecting to all CPUs at once. Is there any co
On Mon, 04 Apr 2011 08:09:29 -0500
Anthony Liguori wrote:
> On 04/04/2011 07:19 AM, Markus Armbruster wrote:
> > [Note cc: Anthony]
> >
> > "Daniel P. Berrange" writes:
> >
> >> On Mon, Mar 07, 2011 at 05:46:28PM +0800, Lai Jiangshan wrote:
> >>> From: Lai Jiangshan
> >>> Date: Mon, 7 Mar 2011 1
On 04/04/2011 07:19 AM, Markus Armbruster wrote:
[Note cc: Anthony]
"Daniel P. Berrange" writes:
On Mon, Mar 07, 2011 at 05:46:28PM +0800, Lai Jiangshan wrote:
From: Lai Jiangshan
Date: Mon, 7 Mar 2011 17:05:15 +0800
Subject: [PATCH 2/2] qemu,qmp: add inject-nmi qmp command
inject-nmi comma
On 04/04/2011 07:54 AM, Avi Kivity wrote:
On 04/04/2011 01:59 PM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
Interesting that with HMP you need to specify a single CPU index, but
with QMP it is injecting to all CPUs at once. Is there any compelling
reason why we'd ever need the ability to only inject to a single
On Mon, 04 Apr 2011 14:19:58 +0200
Markus Armbruster wrote:
> [Note cc: Anthony]
>
> "Daniel P. Berrange" writes:
>
> > On Mon, Mar 07, 2011 at 05:46:28PM +0800, Lai Jiangshan wrote:
> >> From: Lai Jiangshan
> >> Date: Mon, 7 Mar 2011 17:05:15 +0800
> >> Subject: [PATCH 2/2] qemu,qmp: add inj
On 04/04/2011 01:59 PM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
Interesting that with HMP you need to specify a single CPU index, but
with QMP it is injecting to all CPUs at once. Is there any compelling
reason why we'd ever need the ability to only inject to a single CPU
from an app developer POV ?
When a P
[Note cc: Anthony]
"Daniel P. Berrange" writes:
> On Mon, Mar 07, 2011 at 05:46:28PM +0800, Lai Jiangshan wrote:
>> From: Lai Jiangshan
>> Date: Mon, 7 Mar 2011 17:05:15 +0800
>> Subject: [PATCH 2/2] qemu,qmp: add inject-nmi qmp command
>>
>> inject-nmi command injects an NMI on all CPUs of gu
On Mon, Mar 07, 2011 at 05:46:28PM +0800, Lai Jiangshan wrote:
> From: Lai Jiangshan
> Date: Mon, 7 Mar 2011 17:05:15 +0800
> Subject: [PATCH 2/2] qemu,qmp: add inject-nmi qmp command
>
> inject-nmi command injects an NMI on all CPUs of guest.
> It is only supported for x86 guest currently, it wi
43 matches
Mail list logo
