KVM Test result, kernel 51727a1.. , userspace 6a385c9..

KVM Test result, kernel 51727a1.. , userspace 6a385c9..

[Zhao, Yunfeng]

Hi, all,

This is today's KVM test result against kvm.git 51727A110220681F6F43B005D069E28C58F5D151 and kvm-userspace.git 6a385c9539f9746d7ff51ef34c064c3eba86448b.

One regression:
1. Cannot install 64bit vista guests.
https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=893831&aid=1836905&group_id=180599
Old issues:
2. Fails to save/restore guests
https://sourceforge.net/tracker/index.php?func=detail&aid=1824525&group_id=180599&atid=893831
3. xp and win2k3 guest crashes
https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=893831&aid=1819768&group_id=180599
4. xpsp2 with 2vpus may fail to boot
"-no-kvm-irqchip" has the same issue. 
It exists on paxville,woodcrest and clowertown, but doesn't exist on weybridge and santarosa.
https://sourceforge.net/tracker/index.php?func=detail&aid=1805017&group_id=180599&atid=893831
5. Cannot boot 32bit smp RHEL5.1 guest on 64bit host
https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=893831&aid=1812043&group_id=180599
6 Some ltp cases fail on KVM guests
https://sourceforge.net/tracker/index.php?func=detail&aid=1741316&group_id=180599&atid=893831


Test environment
================================================
Platform                woodcrest
CPU                     4
Memory size             8G'
Details
================================================
PAE:

1. boot guest with 256M memory                                   PASS
2. boot two windows xp guest                                         PASS
3. boot 4 same guest in parallel                                     PASS
4. boot linux and windows guest in parallel                  PASS
5. boot 4G linux guest                                                         PASS
6. boot guest with 1500M memory                                  PASS
7. boot windows 2003 with ACPI enabled                     PASS
8. boot Windows xp with ACPI enabled                          PASS
9. boot Windows 2000 without ACPI                              PASS
10. kernel build on SMP linux guest                               PASS
11. LTP on SMP linux guest                                           PASS
12. boot base kernel linux                                              PASS
13. save/restore 32-bit HVM guests                                FAIL
14. live migration 32-bit HVM guests                              FAIL
15. boot SMP Windows xp with ACPI enabled                   FAIL
16. boot SMP windows 2003 with ACPI enabled              FAIL
17. boot SMP Windows 2000 with ACPI enabled              FAIL


================================================
IA32e:

1. boot four 32-bit guest in parallel                             PASS
2. boot four 64-bit guest in parallel                             PASS
3. boot 4G 64-bit guest                                              PASS
4. boot 4G pae guest                                                  PASS
5. boot 32-bit linux and 32 bit windows guest in parallel        PASS
6. boot 32-bit guest with 1500M memory                     PASS
7. boot 64-bit guest with 1500M memory                     PASS
8. boot 32-bit guest with 256M memory                       PASS
9. boot 64-bit guest with 256M memory                       PASS
10. boot two 32-bit windows xp in parallel                   PASS
11. boot four 32-bit different guest in para                  PASS
12. save/restore 64-bit linux guests                             FAIL
13. save/restore 32-bit linux guests                             FAIL
14. boot 32-bit SMP windows 2003 with ACPI enabled      PASS
15. boot 32bit SMP Windows 2000 with ACPI enabled      FAIL
16. boot 32-bit SMP Windows xp with ACPI enabled          FAIL
17. boot 32-bit Windows 2000 without ACPI                     PASS
18. boot 64-bit Windows xp with ACPI enabled                PASS
19. boot 32-bit Windows xp without ACPI                     PASS
20. boot 64-bit vista                                                           PASS
21. kernel build in 32-bit linux guest OS                         PASS
22. kernel build in 64-bit linux guest OS                         PASS
23. LTP on SMP 32-bit linux guest OS                           PASS
24. LTP on SMP 64-bit linux guest OS                           PASS
25. boot 64-bit guests with ACPI enabled                       PASS
26. boot 32-bit x-server                                                  PASS   
27. boot 64-bit SMP windows XP with ACPI enabled        FAIL
28. boot 64-bit SMP windows 2003 with ACPI enabled    FAIL



Report Summary on IA32-pae

Summary Test Report of Last Session
=====================================================================
  	                    Total   Pass    Fail    NoResult   Crash
=====================================================================
control_panel               8       5       3         0        0
Restart                     2       2       0         0        0
gtest                       13      11      2         0        0
=====================================================================
control_panel               8       5       3         0        0
 :KVM_LM_PAE_gPAE           1       0       1         0        0
 :KVM_four_sguest_PAE_gPA   1       1       0         0        0
 :KVM_256M_guest_PAE_gPAE   1       1       0         0        0
 :KVM_linux_win_PAE_gPAE    1       1       0         0        0
 :KVM_1500M_guest_PAE_gPA   1       1       0         0        0
 :KVM_SR_PAE_gPAE           1       0       1         0        0
 :KVM_two_winxp_PAE_gPAE    1       1       0         0        0
 :KVM_4G_guest_PAE_gPAE     1       0       1         0        0
Restart                     2       2       0         0        0
 :GuestPAE_PAE_gPAE         1       1       0         0        0
 :BootTo32pae_PAE_gPAE      1       1       0         0        0
gtest                       13      11      2         0        0
 :ltp_nightly_PAE_gPAE      1       1       0         0        0
 :boot_up_acpi_PAE_gPAE     1       1       0         0        0
 :boot_up_vista_PAE_gPAE    1       1       0         0        0
 :boot_up_acpi_xp_PAE_gPA   1       1       0         0        0
 :boot_up_acpi_win2k3_PAE   1       1       0         0        0
 :boot_base_kernel_PAE_gP   1       1       0         0        0
 :boot_smp_acpi_win2k3_PA   1       1       0         0        0
 :boot_smp_acpi_win2k_PAE   1       0       1         0        0
 :boot_up_acpi_win2k_PAE_   1       1       0         0        0
 :boot_smp_acpi_xp_PAE_gP   1       0       1         0        0
 :boot_up_noacpi_win2k_PA   1       1       0         0        0
 :bootx_PAE_gPAE            1       1       0         0        0
 :kb_nightly_PAE_gPAE       1       1       0         0        0
=====================================================================
Total                       23      18      5         0        0

Report Summary on IA32e

Summary Test Report of Last Session
=====================================================================
  	                    Total   Pass    Fail    NoResult   Crash
=====================================================================
control_panel               15      11      4         0        0
Restart                     3       3       0         0        0
gtest                       22      20      2         0        0
=====================================================================
control_panel               15      11      4         0        0
 :KVM_LM_64_g64             1       0       1         0        0
 :KVM_four_sguest_64_gPAE   1       1       0         0        0
 :KVM_4G_guest_64_g64       1       1       0         0        0
 :KVM_four_sguest_64_g64    1       1       0         0        0
 :KVM_linux_win_64_gPAE     1       1       0         0        0
 :KVM_1500M_guest_64_gPAE   1       1       0         0        0
 :KVM_SR_64_g64             1       0       1         0        0
 :KVM_LM_64_gPAE            1       0       1         0        0
 :KVM_256M_guest_64_g64     1       1       0         0        0
 :KVM_1500M_guest_64_g64    1       1       0         0        0
 :KVM_4G_guest_64_gPAE      1       1       0         0        0
 :KVM_SR_64_gPAE            1       0       1         0        0
 :KVM_256M_guest_64_gPAE    1       1       0         0        0
 :KVM_two_winxp_64_gPAE     1       1       0         0        0
 :KVM_four_dguest_64_gPAE   1       1       0         0        0
Restart                     3       3       0         0        0
 :GuestPAE_64_gPAE          1       1       0         0        0
 :BootTo64_64_gPAE          1       1       0         0        0
 :Guest64_64_gPAE           1       1       0         0        0
gtest                       22      20      2         0        0
 :boot_up_acpi_64_gPAE      1       1       0         0        0
 :boot_up_noacpi_xp_64_gP   1       1       0         0        0
 :boot_smp_acpi_xp_64_g64   1       1       0         0        0
 :boot_base_kernel_64_gPA   1       1       0         0        0
 :boot_smp_acpi_win2k3_64   1       1       0         0        0
 :boot_smp_acpi_win2k_64_   1       0       1         0        0
 :boot_base_kernel_64_g64   1       1       0         0        0
 :bootx_64_gPAE             1       1       0         0        0
 :kb_nightly_64_gPAE        1       1       0         0        0
 :ltp_nightly_64_g64        1       1       0         0        0
 :boot_up_acpi_64_g64       1       1       0         0        0
 :boot_up_noacpi_win2k_64   1       1       0         0        0
 :boot_smp_acpi_xp_64_gPA   1       0       1         0        0
 :boot_up_acpi_win2k3_64_   1       1       0         0        0
 :bootx_64_g64              1       1       0         0        0
 :boot_up_vista_64_g64      1       1       0         0        0
 :boot_up_vista_64_gPAE     1       1       0         0        0
 :ltp_nightly_64_gPAE       1       1       0         0        0
 :boot_up_acpi_xp_64_g64    1       1       0         0        0
 :boot_smp_acpi_win2k3_64   1       1       0         0        0
 :boot_up_noacpi_win2k3_6   1       1       0         0        0
 :kb_nightly_64_g64         1       1       0         0        0
=====================================================================
Total                       40      34      6         0        0

Thanks
Yunfeng

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft
Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2005.
http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/

Re: KVM Test result, kernel 51727a1.. , userspace 6a385c9..

[Avi Kivity]

Zhao, Yunfeng wrote:
> Hi, all,
>
> This is today's KVM test result against kvm.git 51727A110220681F6F43B005D069E28C58F5D151 and kvm-userspace.git 6a385c9539f9746d7ff51ef34c064c3eba86448b.
>
> One regression:
> 1. Cannot install 64bit vista guests.
> https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=893831&aid=1836905&group_id=180599
>   

Internal testing here confirms, but this is not a recent regression.  
When was the last time Vista x64 installed reliably for you? (here, it 
works, but not 100% of the time).

> 6 Some ltp cases fail on KVM guests
> https://sourceforge.net/tracker/index.php?func=detail&aid=1741316&group_id=180599&atid=893831
>
>   

I checked this, and it seems invalid.  Please see the notes I made in 
the bug tracker.


-- 
error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function


-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft
Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2005.
http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/

Re: KVM Test result, kernel 51727a1.. , userspace 6a385c9..

[Zhao, Yunfeng]

>> One regression:
>> 1. Cannot install 64bit vista guests.
>>
>https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?funcÞtail&atid‰3831&aid\x1836905&group_id\x1805
>99
>>
>
>Internal testing here confirms, but this is not a recent regression.
>When was the last time Vista x64 installed reliably for you? (here, it
>works, but not 100% of the time).
[Yunfeng] Yes, it may not be a recent regression, and it may be a platform related issue.
Before we used Harwitch /paxville to do the test, and in a period the installation test could pass without any problem.
But after we switched the test machine to Dempsey/Woodcrest, the installation test always fails.

>
>> 6 Some ltp cases fail on KVM guests
>>
>https://sourceforge.net/tracker/index.php?funcÞtail&aid\x1741316&group_id\x18059
>9&atid‰3831
>>
>>
>
>I checked this, and it seems invalid.  Please see the notes I made in
>the bug tracker.
[Yunfeng] I have retested it. These test cases should be able to pass on KVM.

>
>
>--
>error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft
Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2005.
http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/

Re: KVM Test result, kernel 51727a1.. , userspace 6a385c9..

[Avi Kivity]

Zhao, Yunfeng wrote:
>>
>> https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?funcÞtail&atid‰3831&aid\x1836905&group_id\x1805
>> 99
>>     
>> Internal testing here confirms, but this is not a recent regression.
>> When was the last time Vista x64 installed reliably for you? (here, it
>> works, but not 100% of the time).
>>     
> [Yunfeng] Yes, it may not be a recent regression, and it may be a platform related issue.
> Before we used Harwitch /paxville to do the test, and in a period the installation test could pass without any problem.
> But after we switched the test machine to Dempsey/Woodcrest, the installation test always fails.
>   

Thanks, that's an interesting data point. We'll look further into this.



-- 
error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function


-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft
Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2005.
http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/

Re: KVM Test result, kernel 51727a1.. , userspace 6a385c9..

[Avi Kivity]

Zhao, Yunfeng wrote:
>   
>>> One regression:
>>> 1. Cannot install 64bit vista guests.
>>>
>>>       
>> https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?funcÞtail&atid‰3831&aid\x1836905&group_id\x1805
>> 99
>>     
>> Internal testing here confirms, but this is not a recent regression.
>> When was the last time Vista x64 installed reliably for you? (here, it
>> works, but not 100% of the time).
>>     
> [Yunfeng] Yes, it may not be a recent regression, and it may be a platform related issue.
> Before we used Harwitch /paxville to do the test, and in a period the installation test could pass without any problem.
> But after we switched the test machine to Dempsey/Woodcrest, the installation test always fails.
>
>   

It seems to be related to hardware tpr threshold support, but I'm not 
100% certain.

-- 
error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function


-------------------------------------------------------------------------
SF.Net email is sponsored by: The Future of Linux Business White Paper
from Novell.  From the desktop to the data center, Linux is going
mainstream.  Let it simplify your IT future.
http://altfarm.mediaplex.com/ad/ck/8857-50307-18918-4

Re: KVM Test result, kernel 51727a1.. , userspace 6a385c9..

[Izik Eidus]

Avi Kivity wrote:
> Zhao, Yunfeng wrote:
>   
>>   
>>     
>>>> One regression:
>>>> 1. Cannot install 64bit vista guests.
>>>>
>>>>       
>>>>         
>>> https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?funcÞtail&atid‰3831&aid\x1836905&group_id\x1805
>>> 99
>>>     
>>> Internal testing here confirms, but this is not a recent regression.
>>> When was the last time Vista x64 installed reliably for you? (here, it
>>> works, but not 100% of the time).
>>>     
>>>       
>> [Yunfeng] Yes, it may not be a recent regression, and it may be a platform related issue.
>> Before we used Harwitch /paxville to do the test, and in a period the installation test could pass without any problem.
>> But after we switched the test machine to Dempsey/Woodcrest, the installation test always fails.
>>
>>   
>>     
>
> It seems to be related to hardware tpr threshold support, but I'm not 
> 100% certain.
>   
why do you think so?
tests that i did showed that (at least one of the problems) is in other 
place


-------------------------------------------------------------------------
SF.Net email is sponsored by: The Future of Linux Business White Paper
from Novell.  From the desktop to the data center, Linux is going
mainstream.  Let it simplify your IT future.
http://altfarm.mediaplex.com/ad/ck/8857-50307-18918-4

Re: KVM Test result, kernel 51727a1.. , userspace 6a385c9..

[Avi Kivity]

Izik Eidus wrote:
>>>
>>> [Yunfeng] Yes, it may not be a recent regression, and it may be a platform related issue.
>>> Before we used Harwitch /paxville to do the test, and in a period the installation test could pass without any problem.
>>> But after we switched the test machine to Dempsey/Woodcrest, the installation test always fails.
>>>
>>>   
>>>     
>>>       
>> It seems to be related to hardware tpr threshold support, but I'm not 
>> 100% certain.
>>   
>>     
> why do you think so?
> tests that i did showed that (at least one of the problems) is in other 
> place
>
>
>   

I disabled hardware tpr threshold, and it worked.


-- 
error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function


-------------------------------------------------------------------------
SF.Net email is sponsored by: The Future of Linux Business White Paper
from Novell.  From the desktop to the data center, Linux is going
mainstream.  Let it simplify your IT future.
http://altfarm.mediaplex.com/ad/ck/8857-50307-18918-4

Re: KVM Test result, kernel 51727a1.. , userspace 6a385c9..

[Izik Eidus]

Avi Kivity wrote:
> Izik Eidus wrote:
>>>>
>>>> [Yunfeng] Yes, it may not be a recent regression, and it may be a 
>>>> platform related issue.
>>>> Before we used Harwitch /paxville to do the test, and in a period 
>>>> the installation test could pass without any problem.
>>>> But after we switched the test machine to Dempsey/Woodcrest, the 
>>>> installation test always fails.
>>>>
>>>>             
>>> It seems to be related to hardware tpr threshold support, but I'm 
>>> not 100% certain.
>>>       
>> why do you think so?
>> tests that i did showed that (at least one of the problems) is in 
>> other place
>>
>>
>>   
>
> I disabled hardware tpr threshold, and it worked.
>
>
ok, please let me know when you are 100% sure it is,
i wasted alot of time for this bug

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
SF.Net email is sponsored by: The Future of Linux Business White Paper
from Novell.  From the desktop to the data center, Linux is going
mainstream.  Let it simplify your IT future.
http://altfarm.mediaplex.com/ad/ck/8857-50307-18918-4

Re: KVM Test result, kernel 51727a1.. , userspace 6a385c9..

[Dong, Eddie]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1271 bytes --]

 

>-----Original Message-----
>From: kvm-devel-bounces-5NWGOfrQmneRv+LV9MX5uipxlwaOVQ5f@public.gmane.org 
>[mailto:kvm-devel-bounces-5NWGOfrQmneRv+LV9MX5uipxlwaOVQ5f@public.gmane.org] On Behalf Of 
>Izik Eidus
>Sent: 2007年12月6日 19:27
>To: Avi Kivity
>Cc: kvm-devel
>Subject: Re: [kvm-devel] KVM Test result, kernel 51727a1.. 
>,userspace 6a385c9..
>
>Avi Kivity wrote:
>> Izik Eidus wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> [Yunfeng] Yes, it may not be a recent regression, and it may be a 
>>>>> platform related issue.
>>>>> Before we used Harwitch /paxville to do the test, and in a period 
>>>>> the installation test could pass without any problem.
>>>>> But after we switched the test machine to Dempsey/Woodcrest, the 
>>>>> installation test always fails.
>>>>>
>>>>>             
>>>> It seems to be related to hardware tpr threshold support, but I'm 
>>>> not 100% certain.
>>>>       
>>> why do you think so?
>>> tests that i did showed that (at least one of the problems) is in 
>>> other place
>>>
>>>
>>>   
>>
>> I disabled hardware tpr threshold, and it worked.
>>
>>
>ok, please let me know when you are 100% sure it is,
>i wasted alot of time for this bug
>

How do u disable TPR? Remove the patch, or just remove the setting?


[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 309 bytes --]

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
SF.Net email is sponsored by: The Future of Linux Business White Paper
from Novell.  From the desktop to the data center, Linux is going
mainstream.  Let it simplify your IT future.
http://altfarm.mediaplex.com/ad/ck/8857-50307-18918-4

[-- Attachment #3: Type: text/plain, Size: 186 bytes --]

_______________________________________________
kvm-devel mailing list
kvm-devel-5NWGOfrQmneRv+LV9MX5uipxlwaOVQ5f@public.gmane.org
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/kvm-devel

Re: KVM Test result, kernel 51727a1.. , userspace 6a385c9..

[Avi Kivity]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 234 bytes --]

Dong, Eddie wrote:
> How do u disable TPR? Remove the patch, or just remove the setting?
>   

Just put 'return 0' in cpu_has_tpr_shadow() (or however it is called).


-- 
error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function



[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 309 bytes --]

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
SF.Net email is sponsored by: The Future of Linux Business White Paper
from Novell.  From the desktop to the data center, Linux is going
mainstream.  Let it simplify your IT future.
http://altfarm.mediaplex.com/ad/ck/8857-50307-18918-4

[-- Attachment #3: Type: text/plain, Size: 186 bytes --]

_______________________________________________
kvm-devel mailing list
kvm-devel-5NWGOfrQmneRv+LV9MX5uipxlwaOVQ5f@public.gmane.org
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/kvm-devel

Re: KVM Test result, kernel 51727a1.. , userspace 6a385c9..

[Izik Eidus]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 545 bytes --]

Avi Kivity wrote:
> Dong, Eddie wrote:
>   
>> How do u disable TPR? Remove the patch, or just remove the setting?
>>   
>>     
>
> Just put 'return 0' in cpu_has_tpr_shadow() (or however it is called).
>
>
>   
avi, can you please ask from alexeye to test it with this fix?
(some times i had booted 5 times guests without it crushed after heavy
load but then it did crushed at the 6 time),
to me it look that the only stable version for vista 64 was in the
middle from kvm-35 to kvm-36 (at commit
253abdee5ec2edd0a7f6dc2358bef42e3fdf1f39)...


[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 309 bytes --]

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
SF.Net email is sponsored by: The Future of Linux Business White Paper
from Novell.  From the desktop to the data center, Linux is going
mainstream.  Let it simplify your IT future.
http://altfarm.mediaplex.com/ad/ck/8857-50307-18918-4

[-- Attachment #3: Type: text/plain, Size: 186 bytes --]

_______________________________________________
kvm-devel mailing list
kvm-devel-5NWGOfrQmneRv+LV9MX5uipxlwaOVQ5f@public.gmane.org
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/kvm-devel

Re: KVM Test result, kernel 51727a1.. , userspace 6a385c9..

[Avi Kivity]

Izik Eidus wrote:
> Avi Kivity wrote:
>   
>> Izik Eidus wrote:
>>     
>>>>> [Yunfeng] Yes, it may not be a recent regression, and it may be a 
>>>>> platform related issue.
>>>>> Before we used Harwitch /paxville to do the test, and in a period 
>>>>> the installation test could pass without any problem.
>>>>> But after we switched the test machine to Dempsey/Woodcrest, the 
>>>>> installation test always fails.
>>>>>
>>>>>             
>>>>>           
>>>> It seems to be related to hardware tpr threshold support, but I'm 
>>>> not 100% certain.
>>>>       
>>>>         
>>> why do you think so?
>>> tests that i did showed that (at least one of the problems) is in 
>>> other place
>>>
>>>
>>>   
>>>       
>> I disabled hardware tpr threshold, and it worked.
>>
>>
>>     
> ok, please let me know when you are 100% sure it is,
> i wasted alot of time for this bug
>
>   

I just fixed an x86 emulator problem which makes Vista x64 much happier, 
so it wasn't the only problem.


-- 
error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function


-------------------------------------------------------------------------
SF.Net email is sponsored by: The Future of Linux Business White Paper
from Novell.  From the desktop to the data center, Linux is going
mainstream.  Let it simplify your IT future.
http://altfarm.mediaplex.com/ad/ck/8857-50307-18918-4

Re: KVM Test result, kernel 51727a1.. , userspace 6a385c9..

[Izik Eidus]

Avi Kivity wrote:
> Izik Eidus wrote:
>> Avi Kivity wrote:
>>  
>>> Izik Eidus wrote:
>>>    
>>>>>> [Yunfeng] Yes, it may not be a recent regression, and it may be a 
>>>>>> platform related issue.
>>>>>> Before we used Harwitch /paxville to do the test, and in a period 
>>>>>> the installation test could pass without any problem.
>>>>>> But after we switched the test machine to Dempsey/Woodcrest, the 
>>>>>> installation test always fails.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>                       
>>>>> It seems to be related to hardware tpr threshold support, but I'm 
>>>>> not 100% certain.
>>>>>               
>>>> why do you think so?
>>>> tests that i did showed that (at least one of the problems) is in 
>>>> other place
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>         
>>> I disabled hardware tpr threshold, and it worked.
>>>
>>>
>>>     
>> ok, please let me know when you are 100% sure it is,
>> i wasted alot of time for this bug
>>
>>   
>
> I just fixed an x86 emulator problem which makes Vista x64 much 
> happier, so it wasn't the only problem.
>
>
wow,
it good that you solved it, beacuse looking at the fix i see that i 
could have spent on this another year and not find it

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
SF.Net email is sponsored by: The Future of Linux Business White Paper
from Novell.  From the desktop to the data center, Linux is going
mainstream.  Let it simplify your IT future.
http://altfarm.mediaplex.com/ad/ck/8857-50307-18918-4