On 02/03/2011 04:15 PM, Gleb Natapov wrote:
Maybe this is true for the in-kernel model, but I don't see the issue
(anymore) for the way user space works.
With patch below I can boot Windows7.
diff --git a/hw/apic.c b/hw/apic.c
index 146deca..fdcac88 100644
--- a/hw/apic.c
+++ b/hw/apic.c
On Sun, Feb 06, 2011 at 12:26:40PM +0200, Avi Kivity wrote:
On 02/03/2011 04:15 PM, Gleb Natapov wrote:
Maybe this is true for the in-kernel model, but I don't see the issue
(anymore) for the way user space works.
With patch below I can boot Windows7.
diff --git a/hw/apic.c
On 02/02/2011 05:52 PM, Jan Kiszka wrote:
If there is no problem in the logic of this commit (and I do not see
one yet) then we somewhere miss kicking vcpu when interrupt, that should be
handled, arrives?
I'm not yet confident about the logic of the kernel patch: mov to cr8 is
On 2011-02-03 08:42, Gleb Natapov wrote:
On Wed, Feb 02, 2011 at 05:51:32PM +0100, Jan Kiszka wrote:
Just did so, and I can no longer reproduce the problem. Hmm...
If there is no problem in the logic of this commit (and I do not see
one yet) then we somewhere miss kicking vcpu when interrupt,
On 2011-02-03 09:18, Avi Kivity wrote:
On 02/02/2011 05:52 PM, Jan Kiszka wrote:
If there is no problem in the logic of this commit (and I do not see
one yet) then we somewhere miss kicking vcpu when interrupt, that should be
handled, arrives?
I'm not yet confident about the logic of the
On 02/03/2011 11:32 AM, Jan Kiszka wrote:
On 2011-02-03 09:18, Avi Kivity wrote:
On 02/02/2011 05:52 PM, Jan Kiszka wrote:
If there is no problem in the logic of this commit (and I do not see
one yet) then we somewhere miss kicking vcpu when interrupt, that should
be
handled,
On Thu, Feb 03, 2011 at 10:32:25AM +0100, Jan Kiszka wrote:
On 2011-02-03 09:18, Avi Kivity wrote:
On 02/02/2011 05:52 PM, Jan Kiszka wrote:
If there is no problem in the logic of this commit (and I do not see
one yet) then we somewhere miss kicking vcpu when interrupt, that should
On 2011-02-03 11:04, Marcelo Tosatti wrote:
On Thu, Feb 03, 2011 at 10:32:25AM +0100, Jan Kiszka wrote:
On 2011-02-03 09:18, Avi Kivity wrote:
On 02/02/2011 05:52 PM, Jan Kiszka wrote:
If there is no problem in the logic of this commit (and I do not see
one yet) then we somewhere miss
On 2011-02-03 11:01, Avi Kivity wrote:
On 02/03/2011 11:32 AM, Jan Kiszka wrote:
On 2011-02-03 09:18, Avi Kivity wrote:
On 02/02/2011 05:52 PM, Jan Kiszka wrote:
If there is no problem in the logic of this commit (and I do not see
one yet) then we somewhere miss kicking vcpu when
On 2011-02-03 15:15, Gleb Natapov wrote:
On Thu, Feb 03, 2011 at 11:11:23AM +0100, Jan Kiszka wrote:
On 2011-02-03 11:04, Marcelo Tosatti wrote:
On Thu, Feb 03, 2011 at 10:32:25AM +0100, Jan Kiszka wrote:
On 2011-02-03 09:18, Avi Kivity wrote:
On 02/02/2011 05:52 PM, Jan Kiszka wrote:
If
On Wed, Feb 02, 2011 at 12:58:47PM +0100, Jan Kiszka wrote:
On 2011-02-02 12:55, Gleb Natapov wrote:
On Tue, Feb 01, 2011 at 07:02:03PM +0100, Jan Kiszka wrote:
Hi,
testing my KVM patches, I noticed that none of the 64-bit Windows
versions I have around (early Win7 2003 server) boot in
On 2011-02-02 13:35, Gleb Natapov wrote:
On Wed, Feb 02, 2011 at 12:58:47PM +0100, Jan Kiszka wrote:
On 2011-02-02 12:55, Gleb Natapov wrote:
On Tue, Feb 01, 2011 at 07:02:03PM +0100, Jan Kiszka wrote:
Hi,
testing my KVM patches, I noticed that none of the 64-bit Windows
versions I have
On 02/02/2011 02:50 PM, Jan Kiszka wrote:
Opps, -smp 1. With -smp 2 it boot almost completely and then hangs.
Ah, good (or not good). With Windows 2003 Server, I actually get a Blue
Screen (Stop 0x00b8).
Userspace APIC is broken since it may run with an outdated cr8, does
reverting
On 2011-02-02 14:05, Avi Kivity wrote:
On 02/02/2011 02:50 PM, Jan Kiszka wrote:
Opps, -smp 1. With -smp 2 it boot almost completely and then hangs.
Ah, good (or not good). With Windows 2003 Server, I actually get a Blue
Screen (Stop 0x00b8).
Userspace APIC is broken since it may run
On Wed, Feb 02, 2011 at 02:09:24PM +0100, Jan Kiszka wrote:
On 2011-02-02 14:05, Avi Kivity wrote:
On 02/02/2011 02:50 PM, Jan Kiszka wrote:
Opps, -smp 1. With -smp 2 it boot almost completely and then hangs.
Ah, good (or not good). With Windows 2003 Server, I actually get a Blue
On 02/02/2011 03:11 PM, Gleb Natapov wrote:
On Wed, Feb 02, 2011 at 02:09:24PM +0100, Jan Kiszka wrote:
On 2011-02-02 14:05, Avi Kivity wrote:
On 02/02/2011 02:50 PM, Jan Kiszka wrote:
Opps, -smp 1. With -smp 2 it boot almost completely and then hangs.
Ah, good (or not
On Wed, Feb 02, 2011 at 03:14:26PM +0200, Avi Kivity wrote:
On 02/02/2011 03:11 PM, Gleb Natapov wrote:
On Wed, Feb 02, 2011 at 02:09:24PM +0100, Jan Kiszka wrote:
On 2011-02-02 14:05, Avi Kivity wrote:
On 02/02/2011 02:50 PM, Jan Kiszka wrote:
Opps, -smp 1. With -smp 2 it boot
On 2011-02-02 14:05, Avi Kivity wrote:
On 02/02/2011 02:50 PM, Jan Kiszka wrote:
Opps, -smp 1. With -smp 2 it boot almost completely and then hangs.
Ah, good (or not good). With Windows 2003 Server, I actually get a Blue
Screen (Stop 0x00b8).
Userspace APIC is broken since it may run
On 02/02/2011 04:30 PM, Jan Kiszka wrote:
On 2011-02-02 14:05, Avi Kivity wrote:
On 02/02/2011 02:50 PM, Jan Kiszka wrote:
Opps, -smp 1. With -smp 2 it boot almost completely and then hangs.
Ah, good (or not good). With Windows 2003 Server, I actually get a Blue
Screen (Stop
On 2011-02-02 15:35, Avi Kivity wrote:
On 02/02/2011 04:30 PM, Jan Kiszka wrote:
On 2011-02-02 14:05, Avi Kivity wrote:
On 02/02/2011 02:50 PM, Jan Kiszka wrote:
Opps, -smp 1. With -smp 2 it boot almost completely and then hangs.
Ah, good (or not good). With Windows 2003 Server, I
On 2011-02-02 15:43, Jan Kiszka wrote:
On 2011-02-02 15:35, Avi Kivity wrote:
On 02/02/2011 04:30 PM, Jan Kiszka wrote:
On 2011-02-02 14:05, Avi Kivity wrote:
On 02/02/2011 02:50 PM, Jan Kiszka wrote:
Opps, -smp 1. With -smp 2 it boot almost completely and then hangs.
Ah, good (or not
On 02/02/2011 04:52 PM, Jan Kiszka wrote:
On 2011-02-02 15:43, Jan Kiszka wrote:
On 2011-02-02 15:35, Avi Kivity wrote:
On 02/02/2011 04:30 PM, Jan Kiszka wrote:
On 2011-02-02 14:05, Avi Kivity wrote:
On 02/02/2011 02:50 PM, Jan Kiszka wrote:
Opps, -smp 1. With -smp 2 it boot
On 2011-02-02 16:09, Avi Kivity wrote:
On 02/02/2011 04:52 PM, Jan Kiszka wrote:
On 2011-02-02 15:43, Jan Kiszka wrote:
On 2011-02-02 15:35, Avi Kivity wrote:
On 02/02/2011 04:30 PM, Jan Kiszka wrote:
On 2011-02-02 14:05, Avi Kivity wrote:
On 02/02/2011 02:50 PM, Jan Kiszka wrote:
On 02/02/2011 05:35 PM, Jan Kiszka wrote:
And yet, both are synchronized via qemu_mutex. So we're still missing
something in this picture.
Run apic_set_irq on the vcpu?
static void apic_set_irq(APICState *s, int vector_num, int trigger_mode)
{
apic_irq_delivered +=
On Wed, Feb 02, 2011 at 04:35:25PM +0100, Jan Kiszka wrote:
On 2011-02-02 16:09, Avi Kivity wrote:
On 02/02/2011 04:52 PM, Jan Kiszka wrote:
On 2011-02-02 15:43, Jan Kiszka wrote:
On 2011-02-02 15:35, Avi Kivity wrote:
On 02/02/2011 04:30 PM, Jan Kiszka wrote:
On 2011-02-02 14:05,
On 2011-02-02 16:46, Gleb Natapov wrote:
On Wed, Feb 02, 2011 at 04:35:25PM +0100, Jan Kiszka wrote:
On 2011-02-02 16:09, Avi Kivity wrote:
On 02/02/2011 04:52 PM, Jan Kiszka wrote:
On 2011-02-02 15:43, Jan Kiszka wrote:
On 2011-02-02 15:35, Avi Kivity wrote:
On 02/02/2011 04:30 PM, Jan
On Wed, Feb 02, 2011 at 04:52:11PM +0100, Jan Kiszka wrote:
On 2011-02-02 16:46, Gleb Natapov wrote:
On Wed, Feb 02, 2011 at 04:35:25PM +0100, Jan Kiszka wrote:
On 2011-02-02 16:09, Avi Kivity wrote:
On 02/02/2011 04:52 PM, Jan Kiszka wrote:
On 2011-02-02 15:43, Jan Kiszka wrote:
On
On 2011-02-02 17:29, Gleb Natapov wrote:
On Wed, Feb 02, 2011 at 04:52:11PM +0100, Jan Kiszka wrote:
On 2011-02-02 16:46, Gleb Natapov wrote:
On Wed, Feb 02, 2011 at 04:35:25PM +0100, Jan Kiszka wrote:
On 2011-02-02 16:09, Avi Kivity wrote:
On 02/02/2011 04:52 PM, Jan Kiszka wrote:
On
On Wed, Feb 02, 2011 at 05:36:53PM +0100, Jan Kiszka wrote:
On 2011-02-02 17:29, Gleb Natapov wrote:
On Wed, Feb 02, 2011 at 04:52:11PM +0100, Jan Kiszka wrote:
On 2011-02-02 16:46, Gleb Natapov wrote:
On Wed, Feb 02, 2011 at 04:35:25PM +0100, Jan Kiszka wrote:
On 2011-02-02 16:09, Avi
On 2011-02-02 17:39, Gleb Natapov wrote:
On Wed, Feb 02, 2011 at 05:36:53PM +0100, Jan Kiszka wrote:
On 2011-02-02 17:29, Gleb Natapov wrote:
On Wed, Feb 02, 2011 at 04:52:11PM +0100, Jan Kiszka wrote:
On 2011-02-02 16:46, Gleb Natapov wrote:
On Wed, Feb 02, 2011 at 04:35:25PM +0100, Jan
On Wed, Feb 02, 2011 at 05:51:32PM +0100, Jan Kiszka wrote:
Just did so, and I can no longer reproduce the problem. Hmm...
If there is no problem in the logic of this commit (and I do not see
one yet) then we somewhere miss kicking vcpu when interrupt, that
should be
handled, arrives?
Hi,
testing my KVM patches, I noticed that none of the 64-bit Windows
versions I have around (early Win7 2003 server) boot in KVM mode when
using 2 or more VCPUs and the user space irqchip. This applies to both
upstream KVM and qemu-kvm, with our without any of my current patches. A
subtle
32 matches
Mail list logo
