Re: [PATCH] [19/50] Experimental: detect if SVM is disabled by BIOS

2007-10-01 Thread Joerg Roedel
On Mon, Oct 01, 2007 at 06:47:50PM +0200, Andi Kleen wrote: > On Saturday 22 September 2007 11:17:08 Joerg Roedel wrote: > > I don't think we need this patch. When SVM is disabled KVM will tell on > > module load. > > The point is that people often want to know in advance (before they > even try

Re: [PATCH] [19/50] Experimental: detect if SVM is disabled by BIOS

2007-10-01 Thread Andi Kleen
On Saturday 22 September 2007 11:17:08 Joerg Roedel wrote: > I don't think we need this patch. When SVM is disabled KVM will tell on > module load. The point is that people often want to know in advance (before they even try to use KVM or Xen) if their CPU and BIOS supports this. > Further with

Re: [PATCH] [19/50] Experimental: detect if SVM is disabled by BIOS

2007-09-22 Thread Thomas Gleixner
On Sat, 2007-09-22 at 00:32 +0200, Andi Kleen wrote: > Also allow to set svm lock. Please use two separate patches. The detection and cpuinfo display is not related to set svm lock. > TBD double check, documentation, i386 support Yes, documentation would be useful. See below. > Signed-off-by: A

Re: [PATCH] [19/50] Experimental: detect if SVM is disabled by BIOS

2007-09-22 Thread Joerg Roedel
I don't think we need this patch. When SVM is disabled KVM will tell on module load. Further with SVM-lock it will be possible to re-enable SVM even if it was disabled by BIOS using a key. In this case the user of SVM has to clear the capability bit you set in this patch for all cpus. On Sat, Sep

Re: [PATCH] [19/50] Experimental: detect if SVM is disabled by BIOS

2007-09-21 Thread Sam Ravnborg
On Sat, Sep 22, 2007 at 12:32:18AM +0200, Andi Kleen wrote: > > Also allow to set svm lock. > > TBD double check, documentation, i386 support > > Signed-off-by: Andi Kleen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Could we have this patch tagged with x86 instead of "Experimental" in subject. Sam - To unsubs