From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1M38oP-00029D-C4 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sun, 10 May 2009 09:11:25 -0400 Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1M38oK-00026i-H9 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sun, 10 May 2009 09:11:24 -0400 Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=55196 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1M38oK-00026f-Df for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sun, 10 May 2009 09:11:20 -0400 Received: from mtaout02-winn.ispmail.ntl.com ([81.103.221.48]:58364) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1M38oK-00071S-0e for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sun, 10 May 2009 09:11:20 -0400 Received: from aamtaout01-winn.ispmail.ntl.com ([81.103.221.35]) by mtaout02-winn.ispmail.ntl.com (InterMail vM.7.08.04.00 201-2186-134-20080326) with ESMTP id <20090510131118.XIKJ25388.mtaout02-winn.ispmail.ntl.com@aamtaout01-winn.ispmail.ntl.com> for ; Sun, 10 May 2009 14:11:18 +0100 Received: from miranda.arrow ([213.107.24.213]) by aamtaout01-winn.ispmail.ntl.com (InterMail vG.2.02.00.01 201-2161-120-102-20060912) with ESMTP id <20090510131118.RCFD13254.aamtaout01-winn.ispmail.ntl.com@miranda.arrow> for ; Sun, 10 May 2009 14:11:18 +0100 Received: from sdb by miranda.arrow with local (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1M38oi-00073L-EM for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sun, 10 May 2009 14:11:44 +0100 Date: Sun, 10 May 2009 14:11:44 +0100 From: Stuart Brady Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] Work around misreported kvm cpuid features Message-ID: <20090510131144.GA27093@miranda.arrow> References: <1241959505-22031-1-git-send-email-avi@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1241959505-22031-1-git-send-email-avi@redhat.com> List-Id: qemu-devel.nongnu.org List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: qemu-devel@nongnu.org On Sun, May 10, 2009 at 03:45:05PM +0300, Avi Kivity wrote: > These features are needed by Vista x64 to boot. > + ret |= 1 << 12; /* MTRR */ > + ret |= 1 << 16; /* PAT */ > + ret |= 1 << 7; /* MCE */ > + ret |= 1 << 14; /* MCA */ Just curious -- is there a reason to avoid the use of CPUID_MTRR, CPUID_PAT, CPUID_MCE and CPUID_MCA here? Cheers, -- Stuart Brady