similar to: [PATCHv2] x86info: dump kvm cpuid's

On Mon, Apr 30, 2012 at 11:43:19AM +0300, Gleb Natapov wrote: > On Sun, Apr 29, 2012 at 01:10:21PM +0300, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > > The following makes 'x86info -r' dump kvm cpu ids > > (signature+features) when running in a vm. > > > > On the guest we see the signature and the features: > > eax in: 0x40000000, eax = 00000000 ebx = 4b4d564b ecx =

On Mon, Apr 30, 2012 at 11:43:19AM +0300, Gleb Natapov wrote: > On Sun, Apr 29, 2012 at 01:10:21PM +0300, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > > The following makes 'x86info -r' dump kvm cpu ids > > (signature+features) when running in a vm. > > > > On the guest we see the signature and the features: > > eax in: 0x40000000, eax = 00000000 ebx = 4b4d564b ecx =

On Mon, Dec 05, 2016 at 03:12:52AM +0000, Gonglei (Arei) wrote: > I don't think the root cause of those warnings are introduced by virtio-crypto driver. > > What's your opinion? Sam and David? Root cause here is that arch/sparc/include/asm/topology_64.h references cpu_data without including arch/sparc/include/asm/cpudata.h I think other architectures pull in the dependency from

On Mon, Dec 05, 2016 at 03:12:52AM +0000, Gonglei (Arei) wrote: > I don't think the root cause of those warnings are introduced by virtio-crypto driver. > > What's your opinion? Sam and David? Root cause here is that arch/sparc/include/asm/topology_64.h references cpu_data without including arch/sparc/include/asm/cpudata.h I think other architectures pull in the dependency from

Hi Gonglei. On Thu, Dec 08, 2016 at 12:37:08PM +0800, Gonglei wrote: > >> arch/sparc/include/asm/topology_64.h:44:44: > error: implicit declaration of function 'cpu_data' > [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration] > > #define topology_physical_package_id(cpu) (cpu_data(cpu).proc_id) > ^ > Let's include

Hi Gonglei. On Thu, Dec 08, 2016 at 12:37:08PM +0800, Gonglei wrote: > >> arch/sparc/include/asm/topology_64.h:44:44: > error: implicit declaration of function 'cpu_data' > [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration] > > #define topology_physical_package_id(cpu) (cpu_data(cpu).proc_id) > ^ > Let's include

Hi Could anybody explain me how to check how many L1/L2 cache my cpu have. I'm using CentOS 5.6 *cat /proc/cpuinfo |grep CPU * model name : Intel(R) Core(TM)2 Duo CPU T9300 @ 2.50GHz model name : Intel(R) Core(TM)2 Duo CPU T9300 @ 2.50GHz Diagram of a generic dual-core processor, with CPU-local level 1 caches, and a shared, on-die level 2 cache.

On Mon, Jan 27, 2014 at 10:27:20AM +0100, Pino Toscano wrote: > On Monday 27 January 2014 11:06:14 Kashyap Chamarthy wrote: > > Running virt-builder in a guest Fedora-20 guest hypervisor w/ Rawhide > > Kernel, throws the below: > > > > $ virt-builder fedora-20 --format qcow2 --size 20G > > virt-builder: symbol lookup error: /lib64/libgnutls.so.28: undefined

Hi Gonglei, [auto build test ERROR on cryptodev/master] [also build test ERROR on v4.9-rc7 next-20161202] [if your patch is applied to the wrong git tree, please drop us a note to help improve the system] url: https://github.com/0day-ci/linux/commits/Gonglei/crypto-add-virtio-crypto-driver/20161202-190424 base: https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/herbert/cryptodev-2.6.git master

Hi Gonglei, [auto build test ERROR on cryptodev/master] [also build test ERROR on v4.9-rc7 next-20161202] [if your patch is applied to the wrong git tree, please drop us a note to help improve the system] url: https://github.com/0day-ci/linux/commits/Gonglei/crypto-add-virtio-crypto-driver/20161202-190424 base: https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/herbert/cryptodev-2.6.git master

On Apr 8, 2013, at 2:55 PM, "Robinson, Paul" <Paul_Robinson at playstation.sony.com> wrote: I keep seeing "this is a layering violation" comments on the lists. > While there are a few llvm.org pages that mention layers in passing, > there is nothing (that I've found) actually specifying the layers. > Trying to infer the layering from the code is tedious and

Thanks Richard for a fast reply. Yes, indeed, im working on a nested environment. I try to run v2v inside a VM (L1) and to create an L2 by the conversion process. And on Intel. As I wrote, it fails once in few times, mainly when there is a memory pressure on L0. Kashyap, can you please share your experience? Why should it crash during nested conversion. I'm not too familiar with libguestfs

I keep seeing "this is a layering violation" comments on the lists. While there are a few llvm.org pages that mention layers in passing, there is nothing (that I've found) actually specifying the layers. Trying to infer the layering from the code is tedious and error-prone (or we wouldn't see so many violations in code reviews, eh?). Now, I understand that Google has some sort

Based on cmake/modules/LLVMLibDeps.cmake, I produced a graphviz dot file and then manually removed components and edges until the graph was small enough to be presentable. I don't know if I can actually use LLVM due to its humongousness, but I hope the graph will be helpful to others attempting to comprehend LLVM. PNG attached; dot file follows. digraph G { ipo

Is anyone building dragon-egg on darwin? I am trying to build against the fink gcc45 package that I have prepared for darwin and a updated fink llvm 2.7 package that is built as... ../llvm-2.7/configure --prefix=/sw --prefix=/sw/lib/llvm --mandir=/sw/share/man --infodir=/sw/share/info --with-gmp=/sw --with-libiconv-prefix=/usr --with-system-zlib --with-as=/Developer/usr/bin/as

>> arch/sparc/include/asm/topology_64.h:44:44: error: implicit declaration of function 'cpu_data' [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration] #define topology_physical_package_id(cpu) (cpu_data(cpu).proc_id) ^ Let's include cpudata.h in topology_64.h. Cc: Sam Ravnborg <sam at ravnborg.org> Cc: David S. Miller <davem at

The code, below, in rdmsr_hypervisor_regs (in xen/arch/x86/traps.c) looks wrong. (The same code is in wrmsr_hypervisor_regs.) int rdmsr_hypervisor_regs( uint32_t idx, uint32_t *eax, uint32_t *edx) { idx -= 0x40000000; if ( idx > 0 ) return 0; ... The intent, apparently, is that the function should return zero if the original idx exceeds 0x40000000. However because idx is

v6: - add patch 1/2 to make sparc architecture happy. [Sam] - close created sessions previousely when rekeying. - convert the priority of virtio crypto algs from 4001 to 501 which is enough. v5: - add comments for algs_lock and table_lock. [Stefan] - use kzfree instead of kfree for key material security. [Stefan] - drop unnecessary spin_lock for struct virtio_crypto_ablkcipher_ctx. -

v6: - add patch 1/2 to make sparc architecture happy. [Sam] - close created sessions previousely when rekeying. - convert the priority of virtio crypto algs from 4001 to 501 which is enough. v5: - add comments for algs_lock and table_lock. [Stefan] - use kzfree instead of kfree for key material security. [Stefan] - drop unnecessary spin_lock for struct virtio_crypto_ablkcipher_ctx. -

Hi, I'm trying to build clang under MingW, but I'm getting a number of errors. Could anyone provide some hints as to what you had to do? I got some tips from http://blogs.tedneward.com/2008/02/24/Building+LLVM+On+Windows+Using+MinGW32.aspx, but using the newer packages, as it's a bit old. The ./configure seems to run without errors. The first run of make aborts with errors like: