On Thu, Mar 19, 2015 at 03:02:27PM -0300, Eduardo Habkost wrote: > On Mon, Mar 16, 2015 at 10:24:51AM +0000, Daniel P. Berrange wrote: > > On Fri, Mar 13, 2015 at 04:09:57PM -0300, Eduardo Habkost wrote: > > > With the Intel microcode update that removed HLE and RTM, there will be > > > different kinds of Haswell and Broadwell CPUs out there: some that still > > > have the HLE and RTM features, and some that don't have the HLE and RTM > > > features. On both cases people may be willing to use the pc-*-2.3 > > > machine-types. > > > > > > So, to cover both cases, introduce Haswell-noTSX and Broadwell-noTSX CPU > > > models, for hosts that have Haswell and Broadwell CPUs without TSX support. > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Eduardo Habkost <ehabkost@xxxxxxxxxx> > > > > The addition of Haswell-noTSX looks good to me. > > > > I'm unclear on whether we truely need Broadwell-noTSX though. Did > > Intel actually ship any Broadwell production silicon in which the > > microcode disables this feature, or was it only a problem on > > pre-production samples of Broadwell ? If the latter, I'd say we > > don't need to have a Broadwell-noTSX model added. Perhaps Jun/Don > > can confirm from Intel's side. > > I've talked to Don and Jun, and they confirmed that a Broadwell-noTSX > CPU model will be needed, too. > > I see some Broadwell CPUs without TSX-NI on ark.intel.com, too, so the > TSX errata wouldn't be the only reason for needing the -noTSX model. Ok, your patch looks good. Reviewed-by: Daniel P. Berrange <berrange@xxxxxxxxxx> Regards, Daniel -- |: http://berrange.com -o- http://www.flickr.com/photos/dberrange/ :| |: http://libvirt.org -o- http://virt-manager.org :| |: http://autobuild.org -o- http://search.cpan.org/~danberr/ :| |: http://entangle-photo.org -o- http://live.gnome.org/gtk-vnc :| -- libvir-list mailing list libvir-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/libvir-list