[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20160708110900.GF3808@pd.tnic>
Date: Fri, 8 Jul 2016 13:09:00 +0200
From: Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
To: Eduardo Habkost <ehabkost@...hat.com>
Cc: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
kvm@...r.kernel.org, stable@...r.kernel.org,
Yazen Ghannam <yazen.ghannam@....com>,
Brijesh Singh <brijesh.singh@....com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] KVM: SVM: fix trashing of MSR_TSC_AUX
On Thu, Jul 07, 2016 at 02:43:49PM -0300, Eduardo Habkost wrote:
> I see. If you have an useful use case for it, we may consider
> that. But first I would like to see an actual case where a
> feature was not added to GET_SUPPORTED_CPUID yet, but would not
> crash and burn if forcibly enabled by QEMU.
Ok.
> I mean live migration to a different host (that normally has the
> same CPU vendor). When you live-migrate or use savevm, you need
> to send the machine state to the other host. This is implemented
> using VMStateDescription structs describing the data to be
> migrated. See vmstate_x86_cpu in target-i386/machine.c, for
> example.
>
> You need additional migration sections if the feature introduces
> additional state (e.g. CPU registers) that need to be migrated
> too, to keep the feature working. If there's new state but no
> migration support is implemented yet, you need to add the feature
> to unmigratable_flags.
>
> For an example where no additional state is introduced by new
> features, see:
Thanks for the examples and the explanation - I see the deal now.
Ok, I'll go through the features and see what kind of state the kernel
programs in there and add them to a VMStateDescription thing. Hohumm,
makes sense to me.
Thanks.
--
Regards/Gruss,
Boris.
ECO tip #101: Trim your mails when you reply.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists