On 09/02/2011 02:23 PM, Alexander Graf wrote: > > On 02.09.2011, at 20:14, Scott Wood wrote: > >> On 09/02/2011 10:12 AM, Alexander Graf wrote: >>> >>> Am 02.09.2011 um 01:08 schrieb Scott Wood <scottwood@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>: >>> >>>> Signed-off-by: Scott Wood <scottwood@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> >>> >>> Patch description missing. >> >> It's not missing, it's just brief. :-) >> >> I suppose you could add "The hardcoded behavior prevents SMP support. >> QEMU shall specify the vcpu's PIR as the vcpu id". > > Ok, let me get my head around this. Before, PIR was forced to 0 by > the setup code and set_sregs with PIR != 0 failed. Now it's simply > vcpu_id which is already the correct value. Why didn't I run into > this failure? Why did SMP work for me at all then? Shouldn't the > guest be completely confused and find two CPU 0s? I was wondering about that myself. It looks like PIR isn't used much in Linux on e500v2. There's no msgsnd. It's used to for __secondary_hold_acknowledge, but that has a silent timeout. -Scott -- 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
