From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:54757)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <agraf@suse.de>) id 1WJbZe-0007bj-51
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 28 Feb 2014 23:31:01 -0500
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <agraf@suse.de>) id 1WJbZW-0004s6-Jr
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 28 Feb 2014 23:30:54 -0500
Received: from cantor2.suse.de ([195.135.220.15]:37230 helo=mx2.suse.de)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <agraf@suse.de>) id 1WJbZW-0004rd-Ch
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 28 Feb 2014 23:30:46 -0500
Message-ID: <53117403.2000506@suse.de>
Date: Sat, 01 Mar 2014 06:45:39 +0100
From: Alexander Graf <agraf@suse.de>
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20140228191425.GK17184@ERROL.INI.CMU.EDU>
	<FDFC5CCC-1D0E-49A7-9C97-E2C3A6E93156@suse.de>
	<20140301042533.GA24140@crash.ini.cmu.edu>
In-Reply-To: <20140301042533.GA24140@crash.ini.cmu.edu>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] qemu: x86: report lapic version as 0x14
	instead of 0x11
List-Id: <qemu-devel.nongnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/options/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:qemu-devel@nongnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=subscribe>
To: "Gabriel L. Somlo" <gsomlo@gmail.com>
Cc: "pbonzini@redhat.com" <pbonzini@redhat.com>, "qemu-devel@nongnu.org" <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>, "mst@redhat.com" <mst@redhat.com>

Gabriel L. Somlo wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 01, 2014 at 11:44:33AM +0800, Alexander Graf wrote:
>   
>> Deja vu :). Should we really set this to thd least compatible version or rather to a current one that resembles roughly what we support? Otherwise patches like this will come up for every new osx release.
>>
>> What is the version in Haswell?
>>     
>
> I don't know specifically about Haswell, but OS X has been checking
> for lapic_version >= 14 ever since 10.5, same check, same number.
>
> The latest Intel manual I could find (Feb.2014) says (Vol 3A, page 10-11)
> that the version is contained in bits 0-8 of the version register, and
> that values are 0x00 for the 82489 discrete apic, and 0x10 - 0x15 for
> integrated apic, all other values are reserved.
>
> So I guess we could make it 0x15 and be done with it for a (hopefully)
> long time :)
>   

Sounds good to me :)


Alex