On Wed, Jun 24, 2009 at 7:46 PM, Avi Kivity wrote:
> On 06/24/2009 08:37 PM, Filip Navara wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, Jun 24, 2009 at 11:54 AM, Avi Kivity wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> On 06/23/2009 12:47 AM, Andre Przywara wrote:
>>>
Should we ignore unhandled MSRs like QEMU or Xen do?
>>>
>>> I
On 06/24/2009 08:37 PM, Filip Navara wrote:
On Wed, Jun 24, 2009 at 11:54 AM, Avi Kivity wrote:
On 06/23/2009 12:47 AM, Andre Przywara wrote:
Should we ignore unhandled MSRs like QEMU or Xen do?
Ignoring unhandled msrs is dangerous. If a write has some effect the guest
dep
On Wed, Jun 24, 2009 at 11:54 AM, Avi Kivity wrote:
> On 06/23/2009 12:47 AM, Andre Przywara wrote:
>>
>> Should we ignore unhandled MSRs like QEMU or Xen do?
>>
>
> Ignoring unhandled msrs is dangerous. If a write has some effect the guest
> depends on, and we're not emulating that effect, the gu
Andre Przywara wrote:
> Even worse, most of them cannot be properly emulated (like disable
> Lock prefix).
Disable Lock prefix should be easy to emulate by ignoring it,
shouldn't it? :-)
-- Jamie
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kvm" in
the body of a message to majord.
On 06/24/2009 02:04 PM, Andre Przywara wrote:
Avi Kivity wrote:
On 06/23/2009 12:47 AM, Andre Przywara wrote:
Should we ignore unhandled MSRs like QEMU or Xen do?
Ignoring unhandled msrs is dangerous. If a write has some effect the
guest depends on, and we're not emulating that effect, the
Avi Kivity wrote:
On 06/23/2009 12:47 AM, Andre Przywara wrote:
Should we ignore unhandled MSRs like QEMU or Xen do?
Ignoring unhandled msrs is dangerous. If a write has some effect the
guest depends on, and we're not emulating that effect, the guest will
fail. Similarly if you don't k
On 06/23/2009 12:47 AM, Andre Przywara wrote:
Should we ignore unhandled MSRs like QEMU or Xen do?
Ignoring unhandled msrs is dangerous. If a write has some effect the
guest depends on, and we're not emulating that effect, the guest will
fail. Similarly if you don't know what a register
On 06/23/2009 12:47 AM, Andre Przywara wrote:
Although the guest's CPUID bits can be controlled in a fine grained way
in QEMU, a simple way to inject the host CPU is missing. This is handy
for KVM desktop virtualization, where one wants the guest to support the
full host feature set.
Introduce an
Although the guest's CPUID bits can be controlled in a fine grained way
in QEMU, a simple way to inject the host CPU is missing. This is handy
for KVM desktop virtualization, where one wants the guest to support the
full host feature set.
Introduce another CPU type called 'host', which will propaga
