From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754844AbdEKFIq (ORCPT ); Thu, 11 May 2017 01:08:46 -0400 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:57924 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754028AbdEKFIp (ORCPT ); Thu, 11 May 2017 01:08:45 -0400 DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mx1.redhat.com 28272155E4 Authentication-Results: ext-mx05.extmail.prod.ext.phx2.redhat.com; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=redhat.com Authentication-Results: ext-mx05.extmail.prod.ext.phx2.redhat.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=pbonzini@redhat.com DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 mx1.redhat.com 28272155E4 Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/4] KVM: x86: kvm_mwait_in_guest() cleanup and fixes To: "Gabriel L. Somlo" , =?UTF-8?B?UmFkaW0gS3LEjW3DocWZ?= Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kvm@vger.kernel.org, Alexander Graf , "Michael S. Tsirkin" References: <20170506164825.GG27819@HEDWIG.INI.CMU.EDU> From: Paolo Bonzini Message-ID: <804dde7b-2eff-96e9-5fb8-f2f2678c1eec@redhat.com> Date: Mon, 8 May 2017 09:23:11 +0200 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20170506164825.GG27819@HEDWIG.INI.CMU.EDU> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.5.16 (mx1.redhat.com [10.5.110.29]); Thu, 11 May 2017 05:08:45 +0000 (UTC) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 06/05/2017 18:48, Gabriel L. Somlo wrote: > So, in conclusion; it's not important to *me* that this old machine > keeps working, I'm just volunteering test data points. So please don't > feel obligated in any way to go out of your way on my account. OTOH, > I'm happy to provide feedback as long as you would like me to. > > Along the same lines: Paolo, as the author of commit 2c82878b0cb38fd, > is the Xeon chip listed above one of the "obsolete for virtualization" > models ? Yes - I hadn't tested this model in particular, and this one is a little less obsolete compared to the ones I found without NMI support (a 64-bit Prescott and a 32-bit Yonah), but I still believe it's saner to treat them as obsolete. Can you please run vmxcap (from QEMU's git repository) on that processor and include the output? Paolo > In that case, it makes no sense for me to keep using it for > tests, and the fact that it misbehaves with L1 MWAIT should also not > matter at all.