Re: oops/warning report for the week of November 26, 2008

[Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>]

* Arjan van de Ven <arjan@linux.intel.com> wrote:

> On Thu, 27 Nov 2008 21:18:36 +0100
> Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu> wrote:
> 
> > 
> > * Arjan van de Ven <arjan@linux.intel.com> wrote:
> > 
> > > Ingo Molnar wrote:
> > >> * Arjan van de Ven <arjan@linux.intel.com> wrote:
> > >>
> > >>> Rank 8: mtrr_trim_uncached_memory (warning)
> > >>> 	Reported 227 times (619 total reports)
> > >>> 	There is a high number of machines where our MTRR checks
> > >>> 	trigger. I suspect we are too picky in accepting the MTRR
> > >>> 	configuration.
> > >>
> > >> the warning here means: "the BIOS messed up but we fixed it up for
> > >> you just fine".
> > >
> > > I don't believe that right now. we see so many of these, including 
> > > many "there's no MTRRs at all", that I am seriously suspecting that 
> > > our code is just incorrect somehow and triggering too much.
> > 
> > well we looked at existing reports and Linux was right to fix them
> > up. Show us one that is incorrect, then we can fix it up.
> > 
> > the "no MTRR's" are vmware/(also qemu?) guests not implementing a
> > full CPU emulation.
> 
> ... and it's still our fault in part, since we don't even check to 
> see if a cpu claims to support MTRR before complaining about it...
> 
> easy to fix though:

IIRC the problem is that vmware _does_ claim that it supports MTRRs. 

	Ingo