From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Andreas Tanz <andreas.tanz@kvt.de>
Subject: Re: KVM on Via Nano (Isaiah) CPUs? <Virus checked>
Date: Tue, 12 May 2009 08:48:37 +0200
Message-ID: <200905120848.37869.andreas.tanz@kvt.de>
References: <20090509041641.77B58582C@rmail.inner.net> <4A054DC5.2050406@redhat.com>
Reply-To: andreas.tanz@kvt.de
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
  charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: kvm@vger.kernel.org, Craig Metz <cmetz@inner.net>
To: Avi Kivity <avi@redhat.com>
Return-path: <kvm-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: from mail.kvt.de ([62.154.132.4]:1104 "EHLO mail.kvt.de"
	rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP
	id S1753667AbZELHEA (ORCPT <rfc822;kvm@vger.kernel.org>);
	Tue, 12 May 2009 03:04:00 -0400
In-Reply-To: <4A054DC5.2050406@redhat.com>
Content-Disposition: inline
Sender: kvm-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <kvm.vger.kernel.org>

> Craig Metz wrote:
> > In message <49D396AB.6090304@redhat.com>, you write:
> >   
> >> Via engineers have contacted me and confirmed that this is a problem in 
> >> the processor.
> >>     
> >
> >   Is there a known-fixed CPU revision?
> >
> >   Is there a way to identify working vs. non-working chips, either from IC
> > stamp or from /proc/cpuinfo? (Bonus: is it possible to put a check and an error
> > into the kvm-intel kernel model?)
> >   
> 
> I have no idea.  Please contact Via for this information.
> 

Hi,

I've read an EMail from VIA, telling that the Nano must be at least stepping 3.
Prior steppings have a buggy vt implementation...
(Damn! I have stepping 2 :-I )