From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1NMIJX-0003L2-Pr
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sun, 20 Dec 2009 04:42:59 -0500
Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1NMIJS-0003Go-85
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sun, 20 Dec 2009 04:42:58 -0500
Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=55224 helo=monty-python.gnu.org)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1NMIJS-0003Gb-4c
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sun, 20 Dec 2009 04:42:54 -0500
Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:53719)
	by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60)
	(envelope-from <avi@redhat.com>) id 1NMIJR-0000iD-Ke
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sun, 20 Dec 2009 04:42:53 -0500
Message-ID: <4B2DF198.3070509@redhat.com>
Date: Sun, 20 Dec 2009 11:42:48 +0200
From: Avi Kivity <avi@redhat.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] cpuid problem in upstream qemu with kvm
References: <20091214200002.GA27769@redhat.com>
	<4B2699BB.1090302@codemonkey.ws> <20091214201049.GD6150@redhat.com>
	<4B269D99.8080404@codemonkey.ws> <20091214203125.GH6150@redhat.com>
	<4B26A619.7070503@codemonkey.ws> <20091214211024.GD6100@redhat.com>
	<4B26B2F3.9080102@codemonkey.ws>
	<20091215142820.GA23472@redhat.com>
	<4B27C95E.5080200@codemonkey.ws>
	<20091215175650.GA25529@redhat.com>
In-Reply-To: <20091215175650.GA25529@redhat.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
List-Id: qemu-devel.nongnu.org
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.gnu.org/pipermail/qemu-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:qemu-devel@nongnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=subscribe>
To: "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com>
Cc: Gleb Natapov <gleb@redhat.com>, qemu-devel@nongnu.org

On 12/15/2009 07:56 PM, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
>
> I see.
> But unfortunately this bit has multiple meanings
> for 64/32 bit, kvm does not know whether you will
> run a 32 bit or a 64 bit program.
> This is a cpu architecture bug.
>
>    

Correct.  One bit is used for two separate features (syscall-32 and 
syscall-64).

syscall-32 rarely matters because i386 guests use sysenter.  It's only 
32-on-64 guests that attempt to use syscall.

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