From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jason Kwon Subject: Re: Re: [PATCH] remove _PS0 from the DSDTo Date: Thu, 17 Mar 2011 12:12:21 -0700 Message-ID: <4D825D15.5020107@ericsson.com> References: <987664A83D2D224EAE907B061CE93D53019D874BA3@orsmsx505.amr.corp.intel.com> <4D6BCFC4.9000805@redhat.com> <4D82539B.9080708@ericsson.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com To: Stefano Stabellini Cc: "xen-devel@lists.xensource.com" , "Kay, Allen M" , Guyader , Ian Campbell , Paolo Bonzini Jean List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org On 03/17/2011 11:40 AM, Stefano Stabellini wrote: > On Thu, 17 Mar 2011, Jason Kwon wrote: >> Stefano Stabellini wrote: >>> On Mon, 28 Feb 2011, Paolo Bonzini wrote: >>>> On 02/28/2011 04:33 PM, Stefano Stabellini wrote: >>>>> However there is a simple workaround for it: just disable acpi in the >>>>> config file of the VM. >>>> I think recent Windows versions (Vista and newer) do not boot at all >>>> without ACPI. >>> >>> I am not suggesting to disable ACPI altogether. I am just saying that >>> the only way to get a recent Linux HVM guest to drive a VF is to disable >>> ACPI, unfortunately. >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Xen-devel mailing list >>> Xen-devel@lists.xensource.com >>> http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel >>> >> Hello, >> >> Has this hvmloader patch been finalized? I updated to Xen 4.1 rc7/Dom0 >> 2.6.32.32, and saw that the register_slot ACPI fixes were in the Dom0 >> kernel, but not this hvmloader change. I previously tested this patch >> on Xen 4.1 rc4 and had success with it when booting linux guests. > we are trying to fix this on the Linux kernel side, we have two patches > waiting to be applied: > > https://lkml.org/lkml/2011/2/28/296 > https://lkml.org/lkml/2011/3/8/212 > Thanks Stefano, I missed the second kernel patch. Just to clarify, should these patches be applied to Dom0 or the guest kernel (or both)? Jason