[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20160310190429.GI23251@windriver.com>
Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2016 14:04:29 -0500
From: Paul Gortmaker <paul.gortmaker@...driver.com>
To: Borislav Petkov <bp@...e.de>
CC: Toshi Kani <toshi.kani@....com>,
Richard Purdie <richard.purdie@...uxfoundation.org>,
Toshi Kani <toshi.kani@...com>,
Bruce Ashfield <bruce.ashfield@...driver.com>,
"Hart, Darren" <darren.hart@...el.com>,
"saul.wold" <saul.wold@...el.com>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: runtime regression with "x86/mm/pat: Emulate PAT when it is
disabled"
[Re: runtime regression with "x86/mm/pat: Emulate PAT when it is disabled"] On 10/03/2016 (Thu 18:20) Borislav Petkov wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 10, 2016 at 09:49:51AM -0700, Toshi Kani wrote:
> > This confirms the issue - QEMU's virtual Intel CPU does not support MTRR.
> >
> > When MTRR is disabled, the kernel does not call pat_init(). pat_enabled()
> > is still set to true when CONFIG_X86_PAT is set. CONFIG_X86_PAT depends on
> > CONFIG_MTRR, and assumes that MTRR is enabled.
>
> Aha, so "qemu32" model doesn't support MTRRs but "kvm32" does, for
> example. And so do the majority of the other CPU types.
So, I guess that is a qemu bug? If there is no real silicon out there
that has no MTRR but does claim PAT, then qemu32 is a flawed CPU type?
>
> Paul, can you guys run with something else besides "qemu32"? You can
> even take a 64-bit one and run a 32-bit guest on it.
That is probably more of an RP question. In principle I guess other CPU
types are on the table, and most likely qemu32 is just there from
historical reasons. We do know that we don't want "-cpu host" though,
since that will introduce variability into the automated testing.
Paul.
--
>
> :-)
>
> --
> Regards/Gruss,
> Boris.
>
> SUSE Linux GmbH, GF: Felix Imendörffer, Jane Smithard, Graham Norton, HRB 21284 (AG Nürnberg)
> --
Powered by blists - more mailing lists