From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:39718) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1SPCip-0003RK-Oo for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 01 May 2012 09:02:29 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1SPCin-0004d7-Mq for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 01 May 2012 09:02:27 -0400 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:19516) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1SPCin-0004cW-E3 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 01 May 2012 09:02:25 -0400 Message-ID: <4F9FDEDD.3030806@redhat.com> Date: Tue, 01 May 2012 16:02:21 +0300 From: Avi Kivity MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20120430144214.GA10237@redhat.com> <4F9FD953.7070809@redhat.com> <20120501124939.GA8176@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: <20120501124939.GA8176@redhat.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] qemu: fix cpuid eax for kvm cpu List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: "Michael S. Tsirkin" Cc: davej@redhat.com, Marcelo Tosatti , qemu-devel@nongnu.org, kvm@vger.kernel.org On 05/01/2012 03:49 PM, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > On Tue, May 01, 2012 at 03:38:43PM +0300, Avi Kivity wrote: > > On 04/30/2012 05:42 PM, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > > > cpuid eax should return the max leaf so that > > > guests can find out the valid range. > > > This matches Xen et al. > > > > > > Tested using -cpu kvm64. > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Michael S. Tsirkin > > > --- > > > target-i386/kvm.c | 2 +- > > > 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-) > > > > > > diff --git a/target-i386/kvm.c b/target-i386/kvm.c > > > index e74a9e4..c097248 100644 > > > --- a/target-i386/kvm.c > > > +++ b/target-i386/kvm.c > > > @@ -379,7 +379,7 @@ int kvm_arch_init_vcpu(CPUX86State *env) > > > c->function = KVM_CPUID_SIGNATURE; > > > if (!hyperv_enabled()) { > > > memcpy(signature, "KVMKVMKVM\0\0\0", 12); > > > - c->eax = 0; > > > + c->eax = KVM_CPUID_FEATURES; > > > } else { > > > memcpy(signature, "Microsoft Hv", 12); > > > c->eax = HYPERV_CPUID_MIN; > > > > Should only change for -M 1.1+? > > I don't think we should: it's a bug fix and we don't try to be bug for > bug compatible unless fixing the bug actually affects guest behaviour. > I agree. -- error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function