On Wed, Jun 04, 2014 at 06:34:04PM +0200, Paolo Bonzini wrote: > Il 04/06/2014 16:44, Alexander Graf ha scritto: > > > > > >>Obviously, if you really like the current behavior better you can > >>always reject whatever patch I'll come up with, but I'd like to at > >>least try and see what it would look like :) > > > >I think it's perfectly fine to leave mwait always implemented as NOP - > >it's valid behavior. > > > >As for the CPUID exposure, that should be a pure QEMU thing. If > >overriding CPUID bits the kernel mask tells us doesn't work today, we > >should just make it possible :). > > That should be the purpose of KVM_GET_EMULATED_CPUID, so MWAIT could be > added in __do_cpuid_ent_emulated. However, the corresponding QEMU patches > were never included. Borislav, can you refresh them? > > Paolo I don't understand why would we want mwait bit set in CPUID. The only reason we want the nop is because of broken guests which don't check CPUID. -- MST -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kvm" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
