[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <51EF7A2A.6040003@redhat.com>
Date: Wed, 24 Jul 2013 14:54:34 +0800
From: Jason Wang <jasowang@...hat.com>
To: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
CC: KY Srinivasan <kys@...rosoft.com>,
"tglx@...utronix.de" <tglx@...utronix.de>,
"mingo@...hat.com" <mingo@...hat.com>,
"x86@...nel.org" <x86@...nel.org>,
"gleb@...hat.com" <gleb@...hat.com>,
"pbonzini@...hat.com" <pbonzini@...hat.com>,
"kvm@...r.kernel.org" <kvm@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/4] x86: properly handle kvm emulation of hyperv
On 07/24/2013 12:48 PM, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> On 07/23/2013 09:37 PM, Jason Wang wrote:
>> On 07/23/2013 10:48 PM, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
>>> On 07/23/2013 06:55 AM, KY Srinivasan wrote:
>>>> This strategy of hypervisor detection based on some detection order IMHO is not
>>>> a robust detection strategy. The current scheme works since the only hypervisor emulated
>>>> (by other hypervisors happens to be Hyper-V). What if this were to change.
>>>>
>>> One strategy would be to pick the *last* one in the CPUID list, since
>>> the ones before it are logically the one(s) being emulated...
>>>
>>> -hpa
>>>
>> How about simply does a reverse loop from 0x40010000 to 0x40010000?
>>
> Not all systems like being poked too far into hyperspace. Just remember
> the last match and walk the list.
>
> -hpa
>
Ok, but it raises a question - how to know it was the 'last' match
without knowing all signatures of other hyper-visor?
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists