similar to: [PATCH] perf/x86/intel: Use rdmsrl_safe when initializing RAPL PMU.

Hi, I'm running libvert on a Debian 7 system. I have upgraded libvert and qemu from source (v1.06 and 1.5.0 respectively) and the problem persists. The guest OS is also a Debian 7 system running a non-SMP kernel. The error message from virt-manager is Error starting domain: unsupported configuration: guest and host CPU are not compatible: Host CPU does not provide required features: rtm,

Hi, I'm running libvert on a Debian 7 system. I have upgraded libvert and qemu from source (v1.06 and 1.5.0 respectively) and the problem persists. The guest OS is also a Debian 7 system running a non-SMP kernel. The error message from virt-manager is Error starting domain: unsupported configuration: guest and host CPU are not compatible: Host CPU does not provide required features: rtm,

Fairly straightforward code motion of MSR / TSC / PMC accessors to the sub-arch level. Note that rdmsr/wrmsr_safe functions are not moved; Linux relies on the fault behavior here in the event that certain MSRs are not supported on hardware, and combining this with a VMI wrapper is overly complicated. The instructions are virtualizable with trap and emulate, not on critical code paths, and only

Fairly straightforward code motion of MSR / TSC / PMC accessors to the sub-arch level. Note that rdmsr/wrmsr_safe functions are not moved; Linux relies on the fault behavior here in the event that certain MSRs are not supported on hardware, and combining this with a VMI wrapper is overly complicated. The instructions are virtualizable with trap and emulate, not on critical code paths, and only

On Wed, Jan 16, 2019 at 09:42:21AM +0100, Christophe Dumont wrote: > Hello, > > Do you know what this means : > > kvm: 2918: cpu0 unhandled rdmsr: 0x345 > kvm: 2918: cpu0 unhandled rdmsr: 0x1c9 > kvm: 2918: cpu0 unhandled rdmsr: 0x1a6 > kvm: 2918: cpu0 unhandled rdmsr: 0x1a7 > kvm: 2918: cpu0 unhandled rdmsr: 0x3f6 > tap110i0: no IPv6 routers present > kvm: 2952:

On Thu, Sep 18, 2014 at 6:28 PM, Andy Lutomirski <luto at amacapital.net> wrote: > On Thu, Sep 18, 2014 at 6:03 PM, Andy Lutomirski <luto at amacapital.net> wrote: >> On Thu, Sep 18, 2014 at 5:49 PM, Nakajima, Jun <jun.nakajima at intel.com> wrote: >>> On Thu, Sep 18, 2014 at 3:07 PM, Andy Lutomirski <luto at amacapital.net> wrote: >>>

On Thu, Sep 18, 2014 at 6:28 PM, Andy Lutomirski <luto at amacapital.net> wrote: > On Thu, Sep 18, 2014 at 6:03 PM, Andy Lutomirski <luto at amacapital.net> wrote: >> On Thu, Sep 18, 2014 at 5:49 PM, Nakajima, Jun <jun.nakajima at intel.com> wrote: >>> On Thu, Sep 18, 2014 at 3:07 PM, Andy Lutomirski <luto at amacapital.net> wrote: >>>

On 06/13/2013 10:11 PM, Michael Giardino wrote: > Hi, > > I'm running libvert on a Debian 7 system. I have upgraded libvert and qemu > from source (v1.06 and 1.5.0 respectively) and the problem persists. The > guest OS is also a Debian 7 system running a non-SMP kernel. The error > message from virt-manager is > > Error starting domain: unsupported configuration:

Kashyap: I have not tried integrating your guest xml but I will look over it today when I get a chance. Thank you. Martin: Below is the output from /proc/cpuinfo. Let me know if there is anything else that would be helpful in debugging this. Thank you, Michael Giardino processor : 0 vendor_id : GenuineIntel cpu family : 6 model : 60 model name : Intel(R) Core(TM) i7-4770 CPU @ 3.40GHz stepping

Il 27/08/2014 01:58, Andy Lutomirski ha scritto: > hpa pointed out that the ABI that I chose (an MSR from the KVM range > and a KVM cpuid bit) is unnecessarily KVM-specific. It would be nice > to allocate an MSR that everyone involved can agree on and, rather > than relying on a cpuid bit, just have the guest probe for the MSR. > > This leads to a few questions: > > 1.

Hey, I wanted to add an intrinsics to read MSRs. So I added the intrinsics and lowered it to a new ISD node I created ISD::RDMSR, its first operand is the MSR id. I added a case in X86DAGToDAGISel::Select for ISD::RDMSR. Now I know rdmsr works like so: mov r/ecx, <id> rdmsr r/eax holds the lower 32/64 bit >From what I understood this needs a Token Factor node, nodes which are

Hello, Do you know what this means : kvm: 2918: cpu0 unhandled rdmsr: 0x345 kvm: 2918: cpu0 unhandled rdmsr: 0x1c9 kvm: 2918: cpu0 unhandled rdmsr: 0x1a6 kvm: 2918: cpu0 unhandled rdmsr: 0x1a7 kvm: 2918: cpu0 unhandled rdmsr: 0x3f6 tap110i0: no IPv6 routers present kvm: 2952: cpu0 unhandled rdmsr: 0x345 kvm: 2952: cpu0 unhandled rdmsr: 0x1c9 kvm: 2952: cpu0 unhandled rdmsr: 0x1a6 kvm: 2952: cpu0

With the third generation Opteron parts, AMD switched to an architecturally defined interface for PowerNow! that uses different MSRs than previous versions. This patch brings the PowerNow! driver up to match the mainline Linux driver and provide support for all AMD parts that use or will use the architectural pstate interface. It also removes a WARN_ON statement in kernel/cpu.c that highlights a

hpa pointed out that the ABI that I chose (an MSR from the KVM range and a KVM cpuid bit) is unnecessarily KVM-specific. It would be nice to allocate an MSR that everyone involved can agree on and, rather than relying on a cpuid bit, just have the guest probe for the MSR. This leads to a few questions: 1. How do we allocate an MSR? (For background, this would be an MSR that either returns 64

hpa pointed out that the ABI that I chose (an MSR from the KVM range and a KVM cpuid bit) is unnecessarily KVM-specific. It would be nice to allocate an MSR that everyone involved can agree on and, rather than relying on a cpuid bit, just have the guest probe for the MSR. This leads to a few questions: 1. How do we allocate an MSR? (For background, this would be an MSR that either returns 64

Hello, I recently tried Xen 3.0.3-testing on my 2x Opteron-244 SMP machine. Everything works well exept one detail, which is not unimportant to me: the powernow-k8 driver fails to switch frequencies. A closer look on the powernow-k8 source reveals, that some MSR write operations seem to be without any effect. A rdmsr() before and after the wrmsr() call reveals that no real change on the register

Package: xen-hypervisor-4.1-amd64 Version: 4.1.3-7 Severity: important Tags: patch Dear Maintainer, The PMU may be enabled on the Dom0 although the needed MSRs are not accessible, causing at least major noise on the xen messages ring buffer. I suspect there might also be a performance decrease, because the MSR write is trapped by Xen. Once the PC is in that state, a reboot won't help. This

On 11/26/15 09:47, C. L. Martinez wrote: > Hi all, > > I am trying to install nested Esxi 6.x under a Centos7 kvm host to > use it as test lab for new ESXi versions, but I am doing something > wrong because I can't install it. > > I have configured kvm and kvm_intel modules with the following options: > > options kvm ignore_msrs=1 > options kvm_intel nested=1

Basic infrastructure for Xen S3 support with a common CPU context save/restore logic for both 32bit and 64bit. Wakeup code is split into two parts: - the first locates after trampoline code, to share all the tricks on the latter, like relocation base and identy mapping - the 2nd part locates in xen code segment, to do the actual CPU context restore Signed-off-by Ke Yu

From: Mihai Don?u <mdontu at bitdefender.com> This command is used to get kvm_regs and kvm_sregs structures, plus the list of struct kvm_msrs. Signed-off-by: Mihai Don?u <mdontu at bitdefender.com> Co-developed-by: Adalbert Laz?r <alazar at bitdefender.com> Signed-off-by: Adalbert Laz?r <alazar at bitdefender.com> --- Documentation/virt/kvm/kvmi.rst | 42