Xin, Xiaohui
2006-Sep-12 09:41 UTC
[Xen-devel][PATCH][RESEND]Add broadcast destination for physical destinationmode in LAPIC virtualization code
This patch adds broadcast destination for physical destination mode. Without this patch, HVM x64 Windows cannot install and boot Signed-off-by: Xiaohui Xin <xiaohui.xin@intel.com> _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xensource.com http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
Keir Fraser
2006-Sep-12 09:53 UTC
Re: [Xen-devel][PATCH][RESEND]Add broadcast destination for physical destinationmode in LAPIC virtualization code
On 12/9/06 10:41, "Xin, Xiaohui" <xiaohui.xin@intel.com> wrote:> This patch adds broadcast destination for physical destination mode. Without > this patch, HVM x64 Windows cannot install and boot > > Signed-off-by: Xiaohui Xin <xiaohui.xin@intel.com>Do you need to support 0xF as broadcast dest? Are there VT chips that have a P6-style APIC? I¹m just a little concerned that we may eventually use 0xF as an APIC ID, when we run VT guests with enough VCPUs. We could avoid that though. -- Keir _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xensource.com http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
Keir Fraser
2006-Sep-12 10:02 UTC
Re: [Xen-devel][PATCH][RESEND]Add broadcast destination for physical destinationmode in LAPIC virtualization code
Actually I looked closer and you always make yourself look like a P4/Xeon APIC. So the correct phys broadcast id is always 0xFF for the virtual LAPIC. You shouldn¹t check for 0xF. Right? -- Keir On 12/9/06 10:53, "Keir Fraser" <Keir.Fraser@cl.cam.ac.uk> wrote:> On 12/9/06 10:41, "Xin, Xiaohui" <xiaohui.xin@intel.com> wrote: > >> This patch adds broadcast destination for physical destination mode. Without >> this patch, HVM x64 Windows cannot install and boot >> >> Signed-off-by: Xiaohui Xin <xiaohui.xin@intel.com> > > Do you need to support 0xF as broadcast dest? Are there VT chips that have a > P6-style APIC? I¹m just a little concerned that we may eventually use 0xF as > an APIC ID, when we run VT guests with enough VCPUs. We could avoid that > though. > > -- Keir > > > _______________________________________________ > Xen-devel mailing list > Xen-devel@lists.xensource.com > http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel_______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xensource.com http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
Xin, Xiaohui
2006-Sep-13 01:21 UTC
RE: [Xen-devel][PATCH][RESEND]Add broadcast destination for physical destinationmode in LAPIC virtualization code
Yes, you’re right. And the only phys broadcast id I have met is 0xFF. :-) Thanks Xiaohui ________________________________ From: Keir Fraser [mailto:Keir.Fraser@cl.cam.ac.uk] Sent: 2006年9月12日 18:02 To: Keir Fraser; Xin, Xiaohui; xen-devel@lists.xensource.com Subject: Re: [Xen-devel][PATCH][RESEND]Add broadcast destination for physical destinationmode in LAPIC virtualization code Actually I looked closer and you always make yourself look like a P4/Xeon APIC. So the correct phys broadcast id is always 0xFF for the virtual LAPIC. You shouldn’t check for 0xF. Right? -- Keir On 12/9/06 10:53, "Keir Fraser" <Keir.Fraser@cl.cam.ac.uk> wrote: On 12/9/06 10:41, "Xin, Xiaohui" <xiaohui.xin@intel.com> wrote: This patch adds broadcast destination for physical destination mode. Without this patch, HVM x64 Windows cannot install and boot Signed-off-by: Xiaohui Xin <xiaohui.xin@intel.com> Do you need to support 0xF as broadcast dest? Are there VT chips that have a P6-style APIC? I’m just a little concerned that we may eventually use 0xF as an APIC ID, when we run VT guests with enough VCPUs. We could avoid that though. -- Keir ________________________________ _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xensource.com http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xensource.com http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel