On 10/17/2011 11:17 AM, Vadim Rozenfeld wrote:
@@ -379,11 +380,16 @@ int kvm_arch_init_vcpu(CPUState *env)
cpuid_i = 0;
/* Paravirtualization CPUIDs */
- memcpy(signature, "KVMKVMKVM\0\0\0", 12);
c =&cpuid_data.entries[cpuid_i++];
memset(c, 0, sizeof(*c));
c->function = KVM_CPUID_SIGNATURE;
- c->eax = 0;
+ if (!hyperv_enabled()) {
+ memcpy(signature, "KVMKVMKVM\0\0\0", 12);
+ c->eax = 0;
+ } else {
+ memcpy(signature, "Microsoft Hv", 12);
+ c->eax = HYPERV_CPUID_MIN;
+ }
Even not counting that hyper-v support should IMHO not be in
KVM-specific code, I still think this shouldn't remove KVM leaves
completely but rather move them to 0x40000100. The KVM
paravirtualization code then can similarly probe with 0x100 stride up to
0x40001000. This is what was done for Xen, and it allows to enable
enlightenments independent of whether the guest is Linux or Windows.
However, let's get a third opinion---Avi, what do you think?
Paolo
--
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
