[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: shared features in cpuid


  • To: Olaf Hering <olaf@xxxxxxxxx>
  • From: Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@xxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Fri, 21 Aug 2020 11:25:05 +0100
  • Authentication-results: esa1.hc3370-68.iphmx.com; dkim=none (message not signed) header.i=none
  • Cc: <xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Delivery-date: Fri, 21 Aug 2020 10:25:19 +0000
  • Ironport-sdr: Q6p+bSyp/ps/vi2hsqcrbbp0aCegSZ7uvK9RIN4AXwtunfeahxTkLDu2snGlGbuSM8w+xXLoGx fCsvggdSQmrufoRD3kH0vpaBDtRCCT2FxhKQ8e1jsgDnlBya5I0aKs7gSesX48vTHov6U3T/Dl g38FvFUZq2TABsW7MNm/Lve3NoeDYl5sL3+9Ite/AxsBHhjmrBdrXGfd4dmlD5pAddDd2TUN8C ZFFCiEh6Kf8jABTjJl7C3/Kux401uXOwjj8X6E6wnPv5HJTbomkhDj4nUvaVPVn4WhDl0vzssP MFU=
  • List-id: Xen developer discussion <xen-devel.lists.xenproject.org>

On 21/08/2020 11:12, Olaf Hering wrote:
> While reviewing changed behavior in 'xen-cpuid -d' output between Xen 4.8 and 
> 4.9 I found commit 20e92c97f904aa460e2223c30dcad36c234496b6 ("x86/cpuid: Only 
> recalculate the shared feature bits once").
>
> I wonder what the mentioned "cross-vendor case" in the comment, which was 
> removed from sanitise_featureset(), really means.
>
> Does Xen attempt to support domU migration between AMD and Intel hardware?

http://developer.amd.com/wordpress/media/2012/10/CrossVendorMigration.pdf

This was a feature put in a decade ago.

In practice, cross vendor migration works fine for PV guests, because
almost all of the vendor differences are abstracted away by the PV ABI.

We have no idea if anyone uses it still, but there is quite a lot of
ancillary code for it which we try our best not to break.

~Andrew




 


Rackspace

Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our
servers 24x7x365 and backed by RackSpace's Fanatical Support®.