Re: [BUG] x86 kenel won't boot under Virtual PC

On Friday 05 September 2008 19:31, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
David Sanders wrote:
I recently discovered that x86 kernels won't boot under Virtual PC. In

Could you please confirm if the tip kernel solves the problem?


Yes the patch you supplied (and now in Linus's tree) fixes (part) of the problem.
In order to get a working kernel I also need a patch for the nops.h issue.
I have tested and confirmed that the patch posted by Linus works and finally
solves the problem with virtual PC.

Linus please apply your patch (which I quote below).
---
arch/x86/Kconfig.cpu | 13 ++++++++-----
1 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)

diff --git a/arch/x86/Kconfig.cpu b/arch/x86/Kconfig.cpu
index 2c518fb..b225219 100644
--- a/arch/x86/Kconfig.cpu
+++ b/arch/x86/Kconfig.cpu
@@ -382,14 +382,17 @@ config X86_OOSTORE
# P6_NOPs are a relatively minor optimization that require a family >=
# 6 processor, except that it is broken on certain VIA chips.
# Furthermore, AMD chips prefer a totally different sequence of NOPs
-# (which work on all CPUs). As a result, disallow these if we're
-# compiling X86_GENERIC but not X86_64 (these NOPs do work on all
-# x86-64 capable chips); the list of processors in the right-hand clause
-# are the cores that benefit from this optimization.
+# (which work on all CPUs). In addition, it looks like Virtual PC
+# does not understand them.
+#
+# As a result, disallow these if we're not compiling for X86_64 (these
+# NOPs do work on all x86-64 capable chips); the list of processors in
+# the right-hand clause are the cores that benefit from this optimization.
#
config X86_P6_NOP
def_bool y
- depends on (X86_64 || !X86_GENERIC) && (M686 || MPENTIUMII || MPENTIUMIII || MPENTIUMM || MCORE2 || MPENTIUM4 || MPSC)
+ depends on X86_64
+ depends on (MCORE2 || MPENTIUM4 || MPSC)

config X86_TSC
def_bool y



--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Relevant Pages

  • Re: RT patch acceptance
    ... judge the complexity of a design for that type of system. ... claim that you cannot judge the complexity of a kernel modification. ... Since the patch in question doesn't actually need that information to ... nanokernel's API up to date with additions to Linux's API that RT people ...
    (Linux-Kernel)
  • Re: inline asm semantics: output constraint width smaller than input
    ... Now in this case the patch you suggest might end up hurting the end result ... The below patch is to build the kernel for x86_64, ... # Device Drivers ... # PCI IDE chipsets support ...
    (Linux-Kernel)
  • [RFC] Making percpu module variables have their own memory.
    ... Someone using the -rt patch found that one of the tracing options caused ... 64K for every CPU to cover all the per_cpu variables used in the kernel ... static void wakeup_softirqd_prio ...
    (Linux-Kernel)
  • Re: This is [Re:] How to improve the quality of the kernel[?].
    ... The -mm kernel already implements what your proposed PTS would do. ... If patch have no TS ID, ... Thus i can apply for example lguest patches and implement and test new ... How many open source projects use Bugzilla and how many use the Debian BTS? ...
    (Linux-Kernel)
  • Re: Documentation - how to apply patches for various trees
    ... >> explanation of the various kernel trees and how to apply their patches. ... +a patch to the kernel or, more specifically, what base kernel a patch for ... +and what new version the patch will change the source tree into. ...
    (Linux-Kernel)