WARNING - OLD ARCHIVES

This is an archived copy of the Xen.org mailing list, which we have preserved to ensure that existing links to archives are not broken. The live archive, which contains the latest emails, can be found at http://lists.xen.org/
   
 
 
Xen 
 
Home Products Support Community News
 
   
 

xen-devel

RE: [Xen-devel][PATCH][RESEND]Add broadcast destination for physical des

To: "Keir Fraser" <Keir.Fraser@xxxxxxxxxxxx>, <xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: RE: [Xen-devel][PATCH][RESEND]Add broadcast destination for physical destinationmode in LAPIC virtualization code
From: "Xin, Xiaohui" <xiaohui.xin@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 13 Sep 2006 09:21:27 +0800
Delivery-date: Tue, 12 Sep 2006 18:22:01 -0700
Envelope-to: www-data@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
List-help: <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=help>
List-id: Xen developer discussion <xen-devel.lists.xensource.com>
List-post: <mailto:xen-devel@lists.xensource.com>
List-subscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=subscribe>
List-unsubscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=unsubscribe>
Sender: xen-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Thread-index: AcbWT5jsidfVUI6ZSymoMuYZeVAv0AAAacB3AABPbVsAIBAVkA==
Thread-topic: [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@xxxxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: 2006
912 18:02
To: Keir Fraser; Xin, Xiaohui; xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
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@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

On 12/9/06 10:41, "Xin, Xiaohui" <xiaohui.xin@xxxxxxxxx> 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@xxxxxxxxx>


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@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel

 

_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel