On 22.04.2021 14:07, Roger Pau Monné wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 22, 2021 at 01:42:45PM +0200, Jan Beulich wrote:
>> On 22.04.2021 13:37, Roger Pau Monné wrote:
>>> On Thu, Apr 22, 2021 at 01:05:23PM +0200, Jan Beulich wrote:
On 22.04.2021 12:56, Roger Pau Monné wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 22, 2021 at 1
On Thu, Apr 22, 2021 at 01:42:45PM +0200, Jan Beulich wrote:
> On 22.04.2021 13:37, Roger Pau Monné wrote:
> > On Thu, Apr 22, 2021 at 01:05:23PM +0200, Jan Beulich wrote:
> >> On 22.04.2021 12:56, Roger Pau Monné wrote:
> >>> On Thu, Apr 22, 2021 at 12:48:36PM +0200, Jan Beulich wrote:
> On 2
On 22.04.2021 13:37, Roger Pau Monné wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 22, 2021 at 01:05:23PM +0200, Jan Beulich wrote:
>> On 22.04.2021 12:56, Roger Pau Monné wrote:
>>> On Thu, Apr 22, 2021 at 12:48:36PM +0200, Jan Beulich wrote:
On 22.04.2021 12:34, Roger Pau Monné wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 22, 2021 at 1
On Thu, Apr 22, 2021 at 01:05:23PM +0200, Jan Beulich wrote:
> On 22.04.2021 12:56, Roger Pau Monné wrote:
> > On Thu, Apr 22, 2021 at 12:48:36PM +0200, Jan Beulich wrote:
> >> On 22.04.2021 12:34, Roger Pau Monné wrote:
> >>> On Thu, Apr 22, 2021 at 11:58:45AM +0200, Jan Beulich wrote:
> On 2
On 22.04.2021 12:56, Roger Pau Monné wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 22, 2021 at 12:48:36PM +0200, Jan Beulich wrote:
>> On 22.04.2021 12:34, Roger Pau Monné wrote:
>>> On Thu, Apr 22, 2021 at 11:58:45AM +0200, Jan Beulich wrote:
On 22.04.2021 11:42, Roger Pau Monné wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 14, 2021 at 0
On Thu, Apr 22, 2021 at 12:48:36PM +0200, Jan Beulich wrote:
> On 22.04.2021 12:34, Roger Pau Monné wrote:
> > On Thu, Apr 22, 2021 at 11:58:45AM +0200, Jan Beulich wrote:
> >> On 22.04.2021 11:42, Roger Pau Monné wrote:
> >>> On Wed, Apr 14, 2021 at 03:49:02PM +0200, Jan Beulich wrote:
> On 1
On 22.04.2021 12:34, Roger Pau Monné wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 22, 2021 at 11:58:45AM +0200, Jan Beulich wrote:
>> On 22.04.2021 11:42, Roger Pau Monné wrote:
>>> On Wed, Apr 14, 2021 at 03:49:02PM +0200, Jan Beulich wrote:
On 13.04.2021 16:01, Roger Pau Monne wrote:
> @@ -944,3 +945,130 @@ boo
On Thu, Apr 22, 2021 at 11:58:45AM +0200, Jan Beulich wrote:
> On 22.04.2021 11:42, Roger Pau Monné wrote:
> > On Wed, Apr 14, 2021 at 03:49:02PM +0200, Jan Beulich wrote:
> >> On 13.04.2021 16:01, Roger Pau Monne wrote:
> >>> @@ -944,3 +945,130 @@ bool xc_cpu_policy_is_compatible(xc_interface *xch
On 22.04.2021 11:42, Roger Pau Monné wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 14, 2021 at 03:49:02PM +0200, Jan Beulich wrote:
>> On 13.04.2021 16:01, Roger Pau Monne wrote:
>>> @@ -944,3 +945,130 @@ bool xc_cpu_policy_is_compatible(xc_interface *xch,
>>> const xc_cpu_policy_t host,
>>>
>>> return false;
>>>
On Wed, Apr 14, 2021 at 03:49:02PM +0200, Jan Beulich wrote:
> On 13.04.2021 16:01, Roger Pau Monne wrote:
> > @@ -944,3 +945,130 @@ bool xc_cpu_policy_is_compatible(xc_interface *xch,
> > const xc_cpu_policy_t host,
> >
> > return false;
> > }
> > +
> > +static uint64_t level_msr(unsigned
On Wed, Apr 21, 2021 at 01:26:49PM +0200, Roger Pau Monné wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 21, 2021 at 10:22:39AM +, Wei Liu wrote:
> > On Tue, Apr 13, 2021 at 04:01:33PM +0200, Roger Pau Monne wrote:
> > > Introduce a helper to obtain a compatible cpu policy based on two
> > > input cpu policies. Currentl
On Wed, Apr 21, 2021 at 10:22:39AM +, Wei Liu wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 13, 2021 at 04:01:33PM +0200, Roger Pau Monne wrote:
> > Introduce a helper to obtain a compatible cpu policy based on two
> > input cpu policies. Currently this is done by and'ing all CPUID leaves
> > and MSR entries, except fo
On Tue, Apr 13, 2021 at 04:01:33PM +0200, Roger Pau Monne wrote:
> Introduce a helper to obtain a compatible cpu policy based on two
> input cpu policies. Currently this is done by and'ing all CPUID leaves
> and MSR entries, except for MSR_ARCH_CAPABILITIES which has the RSBA
> bit or'ed.
>
I tho
On 13.04.2021 16:01, Roger Pau Monne wrote:
> @@ -944,3 +945,130 @@ bool xc_cpu_policy_is_compatible(xc_interface *xch,
> const xc_cpu_policy_t host,
>
> return false;
> }
> +
> +static uint64_t level_msr(unsigned int index, uint64_t val1, uint64_t val2)
> +{
> +uint64_t val = val1 & v
Introduce a helper to obtain a compatible cpu policy based on two
input cpu policies. Currently this is done by and'ing all CPUID leaves
and MSR entries, except for MSR_ARCH_CAPABILITIES which has the RSBA
bit or'ed.
The _AC macro is pulled from libxl_internal.h into xen-tools/libs.h
since it's re
15 matches
Mail list logo