On Mon, Apr 15, 2024 at 05:51:56AM -0400, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 15, 2024 at 11:44:50AM +0200, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> > Queued, thanks.
> >
> > Paolo
>
> I actually had it queued too - it's not 9.0 material though.
> If you queue it don't forget to tweak the commit log manually.
On Mon, Apr 15, 2024 at 11:44:50AM +0200, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> Queued, thanks.
>
> Paolo
I actually had it queued too - it's not 9.0 material though.
If you queue it don't forget to tweak the commit log manually.
--
MST
Queued, thanks.
Paolo
On 4/3/2024 11:12 PM, Igor Mammedov wrote:
On Wed, 3 Apr 2024 10:59:53 -0400
Xiaoyao Li wrote:
A value 1 of PCAT_COMPAT (bit 0) of MADT.Flags indicates that the system
also has a PC-AT-compatible dual-8259 setup, i.e., the PIC.
When PIC is not enabled (pic=off) for x86 machine, the
On Wed, 3 Apr 2024 10:59:53 -0400
Xiaoyao Li wrote:
> A value 1 of PCAT_COMPAT (bit 0) of MADT.Flags indicates that the system
> also has a PC-AT-compatible dual-8259 setup, i.e., the PIC.
>
> When PIC is not enabled (pic=off) for x86 machine, the PCAT_COMPAT bit
> needs to be cleared.
A value 1 of PCAT_COMPAT (bit 0) of MADT.Flags indicates that the system
also has a PC-AT-compatible dual-8259 setup, i.e., the PIC.
When PIC is not enabled (pic=off) for x86 machine, the PCAT_COMPAT bit
needs to be cleared. Otherwise, the guest thinks there is a present PIC.
Signed-off-by:
