From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Avi Kivity Subject: Re: KVM on Via Nano (Isaiah) CPUs? Date: Tue, 12 May 2009 09:50:18 +0300 Message-ID: <4A091C2A.8040201@redhat.com> References: <20090509041641.77B58582C@rmail.inner.net> <4A054DC5.2050406@redhat.com> <200905120848.37869.andreas.tanz@kvt.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: kvm@vger.kernel.org, Craig Metz To: andreas.tanz@kvt.de Return-path: Received: from mx2.redhat.com ([66.187.237.31]:54762 "EHLO mx2.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755865AbZELGvP (ORCPT ); Tue, 12 May 2009 02:51:15 -0400 In-Reply-To: <200905120848.37869.andreas.tanz@kvt.de> Sender: kvm-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Andreas Tanz wrote: >> Craig Metz wrote: >> >>> In message <49D396AB.6090304@redhat.com>, you write: >>> >>> >>>> Via engineers have contacted me and confirmed that this is a problem in >>>> the processor. >>>> >>>> >>> Is there a known-fixed CPU revision? >>> >>> Is there a way to identify working vs. non-working chips, either from IC >>> stamp or from /proc/cpuinfo? (Bonus: is it possible to put a check and an error >>> into the kvm-intel kernel model?) >>> >>> >> I have no idea. Please contact Via for this information. >> >> > > Hi, > > I've read an EMail from VIA, telling that the Nano must be at least stepping 3. > Prior steppings have a buggy vt implementation... > (Damn! I have stepping 2 :-I ) > Can you send your /proc/cpuinfo, I'll try to blacklist it. -- Do not meddle in the internals of kernels, for they are subtle and quick to panic.