On Wed, Oct 25, 2023 at 05:27:07PM +0100, Daniel P. Berrangé wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 25, 2023 at 09:12:32AM -0700, Andrea Bolognani wrote:
> > On Fri, Oct 20, 2023 at 12:48:26PM +0200, Michal Prívozník wrote:
> > > On 10/4/23 07:58, Narayana Murty N wrote:
> > > > This patch fixes this issue by return
On Wed, Oct 25, 2023 at 09:12:32AM -0700, Andrea Bolognani wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 20, 2023 at 12:48:26PM +0200, Michal Prívozník wrote:
> > On 10/4/23 07:58, Narayana Murty N wrote:
> > > This patch fixes this issue by returning the size=0 for architectures
> > > other than x86 and SuperH.
> >
> > Wh
On Fri, Oct 20, 2023 at 12:48:26PM +0200, Michal Prívozník wrote:
> On 10/4/23 07:58, Narayana Murty N wrote:
> > This patch fixes this issue by returning the size=0 for architectures
> > other than x86 and SuperH.
>
> Whoa, I had no idea that SH is still alive (an well?).
As of a few months ago,
On 10/4/23 07:58, Narayana Murty N wrote:
> The function virHostCPUGetPhysAddrSize was introduced with commit be1b7d5b18e
> fails on architectures other than x86 and SuperH. The commit 8417c1394cd4d
> fixed the issue only for s390 but the problem is still seen on other
> architectures like ppc whic
The function virHostCPUGetPhysAddrSize was introduced with commit be1b7d5b18e
fails on architectures other than x86 and SuperH. The commit 8417c1394cd4d
fixed the issue only for s390 but the problem is still seen on other
architectures like ppc which does not report Physical address size in their
c
