Re: [PATCH 0/4] KVM: x86: kvm_mwait_in_guest() cleanup and fixes

2017-05-10 Thread Paolo Bonzini
On 06/05/2017 18:48, Gabriel L. Somlo wrote: > So, in conclusion; it's not important to *me* that this old machine > keeps working, I'm just volunteering test data points. So please don't > feel obligated in any way to go out of your way on my account. OTOH, > I'm happy to provide feedback as

Re: [PATCH 0/4] KVM: x86: kvm_mwait_in_guest() cleanup and fixes

2017-05-10 Thread Paolo Bonzini
On 06/05/2017 18:48, Gabriel L. Somlo wrote: > So, in conclusion; it's not important to *me* that this old machine > keeps working, I'm just volunteering test data points. So please don't > feel obligated in any way to go out of your way on my account. OTOH, > I'm happy to provide feedback as

Re: [PATCH 0/4] KVM: x86: kvm_mwait_in_guest() cleanup and fixes

2017-05-06 Thread Gabriel L. Somlo
On Thu, May 04, 2017 at 08:07:15PM +0200, Radim Krčmář wrote: > 2017-05-04 13:56-0400, Gabriel L. Somlo: > > If I wanted to test this (e.g. with OS X 10.8 guests on several of my older > > Mac boxes running Fedora), which git repo would you have me use? (The series > > won't apply directly on top

Re: [PATCH 0/4] KVM: x86: kvm_mwait_in_guest() cleanup and fixes

2017-05-06 Thread Gabriel L. Somlo
On Thu, May 04, 2017 at 08:07:15PM +0200, Radim Krčmář wrote: > 2017-05-04 13:56-0400, Gabriel L. Somlo: > > If I wanted to test this (e.g. with OS X 10.8 guests on several of my older > > Mac boxes running Fedora), which git repo would you have me use? (The series > > won't apply directly on top

Re: [PATCH 0/4] KVM: x86: kvm_mwait_in_guest() cleanup and fixes

2017-05-05 Thread Gabriel L. Somlo
On Thu, May 04, 2017 at 08:07:15PM +0200, Radim Krčmář wrote: > 2017-05-04 13:56-0400, Gabriel L. Somlo: > > If I wanted to test this (e.g. with OS X 10.8 guests on several of my older > > Mac boxes running Fedora), which git repo would you have me use? (The series > > won't apply directly on top

Re: [PATCH 0/4] KVM: x86: kvm_mwait_in_guest() cleanup and fixes

2017-05-05 Thread Gabriel L. Somlo
On Thu, May 04, 2017 at 08:07:15PM +0200, Radim Krčmář wrote: > 2017-05-04 13:56-0400, Gabriel L. Somlo: > > If I wanted to test this (e.g. with OS X 10.8 guests on several of my older > > Mac boxes running Fedora), which git repo would you have me use? (The series > > won't apply directly on top

Re: [PATCH 0/4] KVM: x86: kvm_mwait_in_guest() cleanup and fixes

2017-05-04 Thread Radim Krčmář
2017-05-04 13:56-0400, Gabriel L. Somlo: > If I wanted to test this (e.g. with OS X 10.8 guests on several of my older > Mac boxes running Fedora), which git repo would you have me use? (The series > won't apply directly on top of git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/virt/kvm/kvm.git). The queue branch

Re: [PATCH 0/4] KVM: x86: kvm_mwait_in_guest() cleanup and fixes

2017-05-04 Thread Radim Krčmář
2017-05-04 13:56-0400, Gabriel L. Somlo: > If I wanted to test this (e.g. with OS X 10.8 guests on several of my older > Mac boxes running Fedora), which git repo would you have me use? (The series > won't apply directly on top of git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/virt/kvm/kvm.git). The queue branch

Re: [PATCH 0/4] KVM: x86: kvm_mwait_in_guest() cleanup and fixes

2017-05-04 Thread Gabriel L. Somlo
Hi Radim, On Wed, May 03, 2017 at 09:37:29PM +0200, Radim Krčmář wrote: > kvm_mwait_in_guest() was overcomplicated and also missed one AMD bug > that should prevent MWAIT pass through. > > This series ignores errata that don't have any Linux bug defined; > I know of two minor (not affecting the

Re: [PATCH 0/4] KVM: x86: kvm_mwait_in_guest() cleanup and fixes

2017-05-04 Thread Gabriel L. Somlo
Hi Radim, On Wed, May 03, 2017 at 09:37:29PM +0200, Radim Krčmář wrote: > kvm_mwait_in_guest() was overcomplicated and also missed one AMD bug > that should prevent MWAIT pass through. > > This series ignores errata that don't have any Linux bug defined; > I know of two minor (not affecting the

Re: [PATCH 0/4] KVM: x86: kvm_mwait_in_guest() cleanup and fixes

2017-05-03 Thread Alexander Graf
On 03.05.17 21:37, Radim Krčmář wrote: kvm_mwait_in_guest() was overcomplicated and also missed one AMD bug that should prevent MWAIT pass through. This series ignores errata that don't have any Linux bug defined; I know of two minor (not affecting the host) Core 2 errata: AG36. Split

Re: [PATCH 0/4] KVM: x86: kvm_mwait_in_guest() cleanup and fixes

2017-05-03 Thread Alexander Graf
On 03.05.17 21:37, Radim Krčmář wrote: kvm_mwait_in_guest() was overcomplicated and also missed one AMD bug that should prevent MWAIT pass through. This series ignores errata that don't have any Linux bug defined; I know of two minor (not affecting the host) Core 2 errata: AG36. Split

[PATCH 0/4] KVM: x86: kvm_mwait_in_guest() cleanup and fixes

2017-05-03 Thread Radim Krčmář
kvm_mwait_in_guest() was overcomplicated and also missed one AMD bug that should prevent MWAIT pass through. This series ignores errata that don't have any Linux bug defined; I know of two minor (not affecting the host) Core 2 errata: AG36. Split Locked Stores May not Trigger the Monitoring

[PATCH 0/4] KVM: x86: kvm_mwait_in_guest() cleanup and fixes

2017-05-03 Thread Radim Krčmář
kvm_mwait_in_guest() was overcomplicated and also missed one AMD bug that should prevent MWAIT pass through. This series ignores errata that don't have any Linux bug defined; I know of two minor (not affecting the host) Core 2 errata: AG36. Split Locked Stores May not Trigger the Monitoring