On Mon, Dec 16, 2013 at 02:31:43PM +0100, Radim Krčmář wrote:
> 2013-12-16 13:55+0100, Radim Krčmář:
> > 2013-12-16 14:16+0200, Gleb Natapov:
> > > On Mon, Dec 16, 2013 at 01:01:10PM +0100, Radim Krčmář wrote:
> > > > > > - Where does the 'only one supported cluster' come from?
> > > > > >
> > >
2013-12-16 13:55+0100, Radim Krčmář:
> 2013-12-16 14:16+0200, Gleb Natapov:
> > On Mon, Dec 16, 2013 at 01:01:10PM +0100, Radim Krčmář wrote:
> > > > > - Where does the 'only one supported cluster' come from?
> > > > >
> > > > "only one supported cluster" comes from 8 bit cpuid limitation of
2013-12-16 14:16+0200, Gleb Natapov:
> On Mon, Dec 16, 2013 at 01:01:10PM +0100, Radim Krčmář wrote:
> > > > - Where does the 'only one supported cluster' come from?
> > > >
> > > "only one supported cluster" comes from 8 bit cpuid limitation of KVM's
> > > x2apic
> > > implementation. With 8
On Mon, Dec 16, 2013 at 01:01:10PM +0100, Radim Krčmář wrote:
> > > - Where does the 'only one supported cluster' come from?
> > >
> > "only one supported cluster" comes from 8 bit cpuid limitation of KVM's
> > x2apic
> > implementation. With 8 bit cpuid you can only address cluster 0 in
2013-12-14 11:46+0200, Gleb Natapov:
> On Fri, Dec 13, 2013 at 05:07:54PM +0100, Radim Krčmář wrote:
> > 2013-12-12 21:36+0100, Paolo Bonzini:
> > > From: Gleb Natapov
> > >
> > > A guest can cause a BUG_ON() leading to a host kernel crash.
> > > When the guest writes to the ICR to request an
2013-12-14 11:46+0200, Gleb Natapov:
On Fri, Dec 13, 2013 at 05:07:54PM +0100, Radim Krčmář wrote:
2013-12-12 21:36+0100, Paolo Bonzini:
From: Gleb Natapov g...@redhat.com
A guest can cause a BUG_ON() leading to a host kernel crash.
When the guest writes to the ICR to request an
On Mon, Dec 16, 2013 at 01:01:10PM +0100, Radim Krčmář wrote:
- Where does the 'only one supported cluster' come from?
only one supported cluster comes from 8 bit cpuid limitation of KVM's
x2apic
implementation. With 8 bit cpuid you can only address cluster 0 in logical
mode.
2013-12-16 14:16+0200, Gleb Natapov:
On Mon, Dec 16, 2013 at 01:01:10PM +0100, Radim Krčmář wrote:
- Where does the 'only one supported cluster' come from?
only one supported cluster comes from 8 bit cpuid limitation of KVM's
x2apic
implementation. With 8 bit cpuid you can
2013-12-16 13:55+0100, Radim Krčmář:
2013-12-16 14:16+0200, Gleb Natapov:
On Mon, Dec 16, 2013 at 01:01:10PM +0100, Radim Krčmář wrote:
- Where does the 'only one supported cluster' come from?
only one supported cluster comes from 8 bit cpuid limitation of KVM's
x2apic
On Mon, Dec 16, 2013 at 02:31:43PM +0100, Radim Krčmář wrote:
2013-12-16 13:55+0100, Radim Krčmář:
2013-12-16 14:16+0200, Gleb Natapov:
On Mon, Dec 16, 2013 at 01:01:10PM +0100, Radim Krčmář wrote:
- Where does the 'only one supported cluster' come from?
only one supported
On Fri, Dec 13, 2013 at 06:25:20PM +0100, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> Il 13/12/2013 17:07, Radim Krčmář ha scritto:
> >This bug can only be hit when the destination cpu is > 256, so the
> >request itself is buggy -- we don't support that many in kvm and it
> >would crash when initializing
On Fri, Dec 13, 2013 at 05:07:54PM +0100, Radim Krčmář wrote:
> 2013-12-12 21:36+0100, Paolo Bonzini:
> > From: Gleb Natapov
> >
> > A guest can cause a BUG_ON() leading to a host kernel crash.
> > When the guest writes to the ICR to request an IPI, while in x2apic
> > mode the following things
On Fri, Dec 13, 2013 at 05:07:54PM +0100, Radim Krčmář wrote:
2013-12-12 21:36+0100, Paolo Bonzini:
From: Gleb Natapov g...@redhat.com
A guest can cause a BUG_ON() leading to a host kernel crash.
When the guest writes to the ICR to request an IPI, while in x2apic
mode the following
On Fri, Dec 13, 2013 at 06:25:20PM +0100, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
Il 13/12/2013 17:07, Radim Krčmář ha scritto:
This bug can only be hit when the destination cpu is 256, so the
request itself is buggy -- we don't support that many in kvm and it
would crash when initializing the vcpus
2013-12-13 18:25+0100, Paolo Bonzini:
> Il 13/12/2013 17:07, Radim Krčmář ha scritto:
> >This bug can only be hit when the destination cpu is > 256, so the
> >request itself is buggy -- we don't support that many in kvm and it
> >would crash when initializing the vcpus if we did.
> >
Il 13/12/2013 17:07, Radim Krčmář ha scritto:
>This bug can only be hit when the destination cpu is > 256, so the
>request itself is buggy -- we don't support that many in kvm and it
>would crash when initializing the vcpus if we did.
>=> It looks like we should just ignore the
2013-12-12 21:36+0100, Paolo Bonzini:
> From: Gleb Natapov
>
> A guest can cause a BUG_ON() leading to a host kernel crash.
> When the guest writes to the ICR to request an IPI, while in x2apic
> mode the following things happen, the destination is read from
> ICR2, which is a register that the
2013-12-12 21:36+0100, Paolo Bonzini:
From: Gleb Natapov g...@redhat.com
A guest can cause a BUG_ON() leading to a host kernel crash.
When the guest writes to the ICR to request an IPI, while in x2apic
mode the following things happen, the destination is read from
ICR2, which is a register
Il 13/12/2013 17:07, Radim Krčmář ha scritto:
This bug can only be hit when the destination cpu is 256, so the
request itself is buggy -- we don't support that many in kvm and it
would crash when initializing the vcpus if we did.
= It looks like we should just ignore the ipi,
2013-12-13 18:25+0100, Paolo Bonzini:
Il 13/12/2013 17:07, Radim Krčmář ha scritto:
This bug can only be hit when the destination cpu is 256, so the
request itself is buggy -- we don't support that many in kvm and it
would crash when initializing the vcpus if we did.
= It
20 matches
Mail list logo
