Booting/installing WindowsNT

Booting/installing WindowsNT

[Michael Tokarev]

Apparently with current kvm stable (0.12.3)
Windows NT 4.0 does not install anymore.

With default -cpu, it boots, displays the
"Inspecting your hardware configuration"
message and BSODs with "STOP: 0x0000003E"
error as shown here:
  http://www.corpit.ru/mjt/winnt4_1.gif
With -cpu pentium the situation is a
 >bit< better, it displays:

  Microsoft (R) Windows NT (TM) Version 4.0 (Build 1381).
  1 System Processor [512 MB Memory]  Multiprocessor Kernel

and stops there with 100% CPU usage, never
going any further.

Kvm command line is trivial, with -hda
and -cdrom and -vga std (with -vga cirrus
it displays garbage here).  The only parameters
of interest are:

  -no-acpi - this one has no visible effect
  -cpu pentium - tried that with some change
    but no success anyway.

Anyone know what's going on here?

Thanks!

/mjt

Re: Booting/installing WindowsNT

[Michael Tokarev]

01.05.2010 00:59, Michael Tokarev wrote:
> Apparently with current kvm stable (0.12.3)
> Windows NT 4.0 does not install anymore.
>
> With default -cpu, it boots, displays the
> "Inspecting your hardware configuration"
> message and BSODs with "STOP: 0x0000003E"
> error as shown here:
> http://www.corpit.ru/mjt/winnt4_1.gif
> With -cpu pentium the situation is a
>  >bit< better, it displays:
>
> Microsoft (R) Windows NT (TM) Version 4.0 (Build 1381).
> 1 System Processor [512 MB Memory] Multiprocessor Kernel
>
> and stops there with 100% CPU usage, never
> going any further.
>
> Kvm command line is trivial, with -hda
> and -cdrom and -vga std (with -vga cirrus
> it displays garbage here). The only parameters
> of interest are:
>
> -no-acpi - this one has no visible effect
> -cpu pentium - tried that with some change
> but no success anyway.

I were able to boot and install it just fine
using -cpu host (without -no-acpi or any
other option).

  Microsoft(R) Windows NT(R) version 4.0 (Build 1381: Service Pack 1)
  (C) 1981-1996

where my host cpu is Athlon X2-64 4850e (2 cores).

I tried a few other -cpu values, but no luck - it
either BSODs with 0x3E error, or stops after first
kernel message.

> Anyone know what's going on here?

Thanks!

/mjt

Re: Booting/installing WindowsNT

[Avi Kivity]

On 05/01/2010 12:40 AM, Michael Tokarev wrote:
> 01.05.2010 00:59, Michael Tokarev wrote:
>> Apparently with current kvm stable (0.12.3)
>> Windows NT 4.0 does not install anymore.
>>
>> With default -cpu, it boots, displays the
>> "Inspecting your hardware configuration"
>> message and BSODs with "STOP: 0x0000003E"
>> error as shown here:
>> http://www.corpit.ru/mjt/winnt4_1.gif
>> With -cpu pentium the situation is a
>> >bit< better, it displays:
>>
>> Microsoft (R) Windows NT (TM) Version 4.0 (Build 1381).
>> 1 System Processor [512 MB Memory] Multiprocessor Kernel
>>
>> and stops there with 100% CPU usage, never
>> going any further.
>>
>> Kvm command line is trivial, with -hda
>> and -cdrom and -vga std (with -vga cirrus
>> it displays garbage here). The only parameters
>> of interest are:
>>
>> -no-acpi - this one has no visible effect
>> -cpu pentium - tried that with some change
>> but no success anyway.
>
> I were able to boot and install it just fine
> using -cpu host (without -no-acpi or any
> other option).
>
>  Microsoft(R) Windows NT(R) version 4.0 (Build 1381: Service Pack 1)
>  (C) 1981-1996
>
> where my host cpu is Athlon X2-64 4850e (2 cores).
>
> I tried a few other -cpu values, but no luck - it
> either BSODs with 0x3E error, or stops after first
> kernel message.

Interesting.  Can you try -cpu host with the family/model/vendor etc 
used by -cpu qemu64?


-- 
error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function

Re: Booting/installing WindowsNT

[Michael Tokarev]

02.05.2010 14:04, Avi Kivity wrote:
> On 05/01/2010 12:40 AM, Michael Tokarev wrote:
>> 01.05.2010 00:59, Michael Tokarev wrote:
>>> Apparently with current kvm stable (0.12.3)
>>> Windows NT 4.0 does not install anymore.
>>>
>>> With default -cpu, it boots, displays the
>>> "Inspecting your hardware configuration"
>>> message and BSODs with "STOP: 0x0000003E"
>>> error as shown here:
>>> http://www.corpit.ru/mjt/winnt4_1.gif
>>> With -cpu pentium the situation is a
>>> >bit< better, it displays:
>>>
>>> Microsoft (R) Windows NT (TM) Version 4.0 (Build 1381).
>>> 1 System Processor [512 MB Memory] Multiprocessor Kernel
>>>
>>> and stops there with 100% CPU usage, never
>>> going any further.
>>>
>>> Kvm command line is trivial, with -hda
>>> and -cdrom and -vga std (with -vga cirrus
>>> it displays garbage here). The only parameters
>>> of interest are:
>>>
>>> -no-acpi - this one has no visible effect
>>> -cpu pentium - tried that with some change
>>> but no success anyway.
>>
>> I were able to boot and install it just fine
>> using -cpu host (without -no-acpi or any
>> other option).
>>
>> Microsoft(R) Windows NT(R) version 4.0 (Build 1381: Service Pack 1)
>> (C) 1981-1996
>>
>> where my host cpu is Athlon X2-64 4850e (2 cores).
>>
>> I tried a few other -cpu values, but no luck - it
>> either BSODs with 0x3E error, or stops after first
>> kernel message.
>
> Interesting. Can you try -cpu host with the family/model/vendor etc used
> by -cpu qemu64?

Here we go.

cpuinfo from kvm default cpu:
processor	: 0
vendor_id	: AuthenticAMD
cpu family	: 6
model		: 2
model name	: QEMU Virtual CPU version 0.12.3
stepping	: 3
cpu MHz		: 2500.000
cache size	: 512 KB
fpu		: yes
fpu_exception	: yes
cpuid level	: 4
wp		: yes
flags		: fpu de pse tsc msr pae mce cx8 apic sep mtrr pge mca cmov pat pse36 clflush mmx fxsr sse sse2 syscall nx lm up pni cx16 hypervisor lahf_lm
bogomips	: 5002.33
TLB size	: 1024 4K pages
clflush size	: 64
cache_alignment	: 64
address sizes	: 40 bits physical, 48 bits virtual
power management:


cpuinfo from host:

processor	: 0
vendor_id	: AuthenticAMD
cpu family	: 15
model		: 107
model name	: AMD Athlon(tm) Dual Core Processor 4850e
stepping	: 2
cpu MHz		: 1000.000
cache size	: 512 KB
physical id	: 0
siblings	: 2
core id		: 0
cpu cores	: 2
apicid		: 0
initial apicid	: 0
fpu		: yes
fpu_exception	: yes
cpuid level	: 1
wp		: yes
flags		: fpu vme de pse tsc msr pae mce cx8 apic sep mtrr pge mca cmov pat pse36 clflush mmx fxsr sse sse2 ht syscall nx mmxext fxsr_opt rdtscp lm 3dnowext 3dnow rep_good extd_apicid pni cx16 lahf_lm cmp_legacy svm extapic cr8_legacy 3dnowprefetch lbrv
bogomips	: 1003.48
TLB size	: 1024 4K pages
clflush size	: 64
cache_alignment	: 64
address sizes	: 40 bits physical, 48 bits virtual
power management: ts fid vid ttp tm stc 100mhzsteps


running with -cpu host,vendor=AuthenticAMD,model=2,family=6 :

processor	: 0
vendor_id	: AuthenticAMD
cpu family	: 6
model		: 2
model name	: AMD Athlon(tm) Dual Core Processor 4850e
stepping	: 2
cpu MHz		: 2500.000
cache size	: 512 KB
fpu		: yes
fpu_exception	: yes
cpuid level	: 1
wp		: yes
flags		: fpu vme de pse tsc msr pae mce cx8 apic sep mtrr pge mca cmov pat pse36 clflush mmx fxsr sse sse2 syscall nx mmxext fxsr_opt lm up pni cx16 hypervisor lahf_lm cmp_legacy cr8_legacy 3dnowprefetch
bogomips	: 4401.33
TLB size	: 1024 4K pages
clflush size	: 64
cache_alignment	: 64
address sizes	: 40 bits physical, 48 bits virtual
power management:

WindowsNT works, just like with -cpu host.

There are a few more data points.

After installing, winNT does not boot without -cpu host,
with exactly the same diagnostics as before (0x0000003E).
But: After installing service pack 6, it boots just fine
with any -cpu, including the default qemu64.

With qemu-kvm-0.11.4 it all just works without any
additional options.

I asked the other person with this issue (see debian bug,
http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=575439 )
to try -cpu host, but for him it didn't help.  I suspect
(but don't know for sure) he's running it on Intel CPU.

Thanks!

/mjt

Re: Booting/installing WindowsNT

[Avi Kivity]

On 05/02/2010 07:12 PM, Michael Tokarev wrote:
>
>
> After installing, winNT does not boot without -cpu host,
> with exactly the same diagnostics as before (0x0000003E).
> But: After installing service pack 6, it boots just fine
> with any -cpu, including the default qemu64.
>
> With qemu-kvm-0.11.4 it all just works without any
> additional options.
>
> I asked the other person with this issue (see debian bug,
> http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=575439 )
> to try -cpu host, but for him it didn't help.  I suspect
> (but don't know for sure) he's running it on Intel CPU.

Ok.  Please try the following:

qemu-0.12 with 0.11's bios.

compare the cpuid flags from 0.11 and 0.12, mix and match until 0.12 works.

-- 
I have a truly marvellous patch that fixes the bug which this
signature is too narrow to contain.

Re: Booting/installing WindowsNT

[Michael Tokarev]

02.05.2010 20:40, Avi Kivity wrote:
> On 05/02/2010 07:12 PM, Michael Tokarev wrote:
>>
>>
>> After installing, winNT does not boot without -cpu host,
>> with exactly the same diagnostics as before (0x0000003E).
>> But: After installing service pack 6, it boots just fine
>> with any -cpu, including the default qemu64.
>>
>> With qemu-kvm-0.11.4 it all just works without any
>> additional options.
>>
>> I asked the other person with this issue (see debian bug,
>> http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=575439 )
>> to try -cpu host, but for him it didn't help. I suspect
>> (but don't know for sure) he's running it on Intel CPU.
>
> Ok. Please try the following:
>
> qemu-0.12 with 0.11's bios.

I tried that as one of first options.  I can't get it to
boot at all, kvm displays the sdl window with black background
and it stays black, no even bios messages are shown.

Thanks!

/mjt

> compare the cpuid flags from 0.11 and 0.12, mix and match until 0.12 works.
>

Re: Booting/installing WindowsNT

[Andre Przywara]

Michael Tokarev wrote:
> 02.05.2010 14:04, Avi Kivity wrote:
>> On 05/01/2010 12:40 AM, Michael Tokarev wrote:
>>> 01.05.2010 00:59, Michael Tokarev wrote:
>>>> Apparently with current kvm stable (0.12.3)
>>>> Windows NT 4.0 does not install anymore.
>>>>
>>>> With default -cpu, it boots, displays the
>>>> "Inspecting your hardware configuration"
>>>> message and BSODs with "STOP: 0x0000003E"
>>>> error as shown here:
>>>> http://www.corpit.ru/mjt/winnt4_1.gif
>>>> With -cpu pentium the situation is a
>>>> >bit< better, it displays:
>>>>
>>>> Microsoft (R) Windows NT (TM) Version 4.0 (Build 1381).
>>>> 1 System Processor [512 MB Memory] Multiprocessor Kernel
....

Michael,

can you try -cpu kvm64? This should be somewhat in between -cpu host and 
-cpu qemu64.
Also look in dmesg for uncatched rd/wrmsrs. In case you find something 
there, please try:
# modprobe kvm ignore_msrs=1
(You have to unload the modules first)

Regards,
Andre.

-- 
Andre Przywara
AMD-OSRC (Dresden)
Tel: x29712

Re: Booting/installing WindowsNT

[Avi Kivity]

On 05/03/2010 11:24 AM, Andre Przywara wrote:
>
> can you try -cpu kvm64? This should be somewhat in between -cpu host 
> and -cpu qemu64.
> Also look in dmesg for uncatched rd/wrmsrs. In case you find something 
> there, please try:
> # modprobe kvm ignore_msrs=1
> (You have to unload the modules first)

It's unlikely NT 4 will touch msrs, it's used to running on very old 
hardware (pre-msr, even).  I expect it's a problem with the bios or 
vendor/model/blah.

(worth trying anyway)

-- 
error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function

Re: Booting/installing WindowsNT

[Andre Przywara]

Avi Kivity wrote:
> On 05/03/2010 11:24 AM, Andre Przywara wrote:
>>
>> can you try -cpu kvm64? This should be somewhat in between -cpu host 
>> and -cpu qemu64.
>> Also look in dmesg for uncatched rd/wrmsrs. In case you find something 
>> there, please try:
>> # modprobe kvm ignore_msrs=1
>> (You have to unload the modules first)
> 
> It's unlikely NT 4 will touch msrs, it's used to running on very old 
> hardware (pre-msr, even).  I expect it's a problem with the bios or 
> vendor/model/blah.
That is probably right, although I could be that it uses some MSRs if it 
finds the CPUID bit set. But I just wanted to make sure that not the issue.

I made a diff of the CPUID flags between qemu64 and Michael's host, the 
difference is:
only on qemu64: up hypervisor
up is a Linux pseudo flag for a SMP kernel running on an UP host, the 
hypervisor bit has been introduced much later than even SP6. I guess 
that is OK, but note that Linux supposedly recognizes the single VCPU 
guest with -cpu host as SMP. But I guess that is not an issue for NT4, 
since it does not know about multi-core CPUs and CPUID based topology 
detection.

only on host: vme ht mmxext fxsr_opt rdtscp 3dnowext 3dnow rep_good 
extd_apicid
cmp_legacy svm extapic cr8_legacy 3dnowprefetch lbrv 

Most of the features are far younger than NT4, only "vme" sticks out.
This is pretty old flag, but I am not sure if that matters. My 
documentation reads:
VME: virtual-mode enhancements. CR4.VME, CR4.PVI, software interrupt 
indirection, expansion of the TSS with the software, indirection bitmap, 
EFLAGS.VIF, EFLAGS.VIP.

Let's just rule that out:

Michael, can you try to use -cpu host,-vme and see if that makes a 
difference?

Thanks,
Andre.

-- 
Andre Przywara
AMD-Operating System Research Center (OSRC), Dresden, Germany
Tel: +49 351 448-3567-12

Re: Booting/installing WindowsNT

[Michael Tokarev]

03.05.2010 12:24, Andre Przywara wrote:
> Michael Tokarev wrote:
>> 02.05.2010 14:04, Avi Kivity wrote:
>>> On 05/01/2010 12:40 AM, Michael Tokarev wrote:
>>>> 01.05.2010 00:59, Michael Tokarev wrote:
>>>>> Apparently with current kvm stable (0.12.3)
>>>>> Windows NT 4.0 does not install anymore.
>>>>>
>>>>> With default -cpu, it boots, displays the
>>>>> "Inspecting your hardware configuration"
>>>>> message and BSODs with "STOP: 0x0000003E"
>>>>> error as shown here:
>>>>> http://www.corpit.ru/mjt/winnt4_1.gif
>>>>> With -cpu pentium the situation is a
>>>>> >bit< better, it displays:
>>>>>
>>>>> Microsoft (R) Windows NT (TM) Version 4.0 (Build 1381).
>>>>> 1 System Processor [512 MB Memory] Multiprocessor Kernel
> ....
>
> Michael,
>
> can you try -cpu kvm64? This should be somewhat in between -cpu host and
> -cpu qemu64.

It stops during boot with the same "STOP 0x0000003E" message.

> Also look in dmesg for uncatched rd/wrmsrs. In case you find something
> there, please try:

Nothing in host dmesg, nothing at all.

Thanks!

/mjt

Re: Booting/installing WindowsNT

[Michael Tokarev]

03.05.2010 13:28, Andre Przywara wrote:
> Avi Kivity wrote:
>> On 05/03/2010 11:24 AM, Andre Przywara wrote:
>>>
>>> can you try -cpu kvm64? This should be somewhat in between -cpu host
>>> and -cpu qemu64.
>>> Also look in dmesg for uncatched rd/wrmsrs. In case you find
>>> something there, please try:
>>> # modprobe kvm ignore_msrs=1
>>> (You have to unload the modules first)
>>
>> It's unlikely NT 4 will touch msrs, it's used to running on very old
>> hardware (pre-msr, even). I expect it's a problem with the bios or
>> vendor/model/blah.
> That is probably right, although I could be that it uses some MSRs if it
> finds the CPUID bit set. But I just wanted to make sure that not the issue.
>
> I made a diff of the CPUID flags between qemu64 and Michael's host, the
> difference is:
> only on qemu64: up hypervisor
> up is a Linux pseudo flag for a SMP kernel running on an UP host, the
> hypervisor bit has been introduced much later than even SP6. I guess
> that is OK, but note that Linux supposedly recognizes the single VCPU
> guest with -cpu host as SMP. But I guess that is not an issue for NT4,
> since it does not know about multi-core CPUs and CPUID based topology
> detection.
>
> only on host: vme ht mmxext fxsr_opt rdtscp 3dnowext 3dnow rep_good
> extd_apicid
> cmp_legacy svm extapic cr8_legacy 3dnowprefetch lbrv
> Most of the features are far younger than NT4, only "vme" sticks out.
> This is pretty old flag, but I am not sure if that matters. My
> documentation reads:
> VME: virtual-mode enhancements. CR4.VME, CR4.PVI, software interrupt
> indirection, expansion of the TSS with the software, indirection bitmap,
> EFLAGS.VIF, EFLAGS.VIP.
>
> Let's just rule that out:
>
> Michael, can you try to use -cpu host,-vme and see if that makes a
> difference?

With -cpu host,-vme winNT boots just fine as with just -cpu host.

I also tried with -cpu qemu64 and kvm64, with +vme and -vme (4
combinations in total) - in all cases winNT crashes with the
same 0x0000003E error.  So it appears that vme makes no
difference.

While trying some other combinations, I noticed that with
-cpu pentium, while the install CD stops after loading
kernel (no BSoD as with other cases, it just stalls),
it stops... differently than in other cases.  It sits
there doing exactly nothing, all host CPUs are idle,
there's no progress of any sort.  In all other cases
the guest cpu is working at full speed all the time.

Just.. random observation, yet another one... ;)

Thanks!

/mjt

Re: Booting/installing WindowsNT

[Avi Kivity]

On 05/03/2010 08:03 PM, Michael Tokarev wrote:
>> Michael, can you try to use -cpu host,-vme and see if that makes a
>> difference?
>
>
> With -cpu host,-vme winNT boots just fine as with just -cpu host.
>
> I also tried with -cpu qemu64 and kvm64, with +vme and -vme (4
> combinations in total) - in all cases winNT crashes with the
> same 0x0000003E error.  So it appears that vme makes no
> difference.

Please try again the model/vendor/family.  I suggest using x86info on 
both to see what the differences are, using -cpu host with overrides to 
make it equivalent to qemu64 (and verifying it fails), then removing the 
overrides one by one until it works.

-- 
error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function

Re: Booting/installing WindowsNT

[Andre Przywara]

Avi Kivity wrote:
> On 05/03/2010 08:03 PM, Michael Tokarev wrote:
>>> Michael, can you try to use -cpu host,-vme and see if that makes a
>>> difference?
>>
>>
>> With -cpu host,-vme winNT boots just fine as with just -cpu host.
>>
>> I also tried with -cpu qemu64 and kvm64, with +vme and -vme (4
>> combinations in total) - in all cases winNT crashes with the
>> same 0x0000003E error.  So it appears that vme makes no
>> difference.
> 
> Please try again the model/vendor/family.  I suggest using x86info on 
> both to see what the differences are, using -cpu host with overrides to 
> make it equivalent to qemu64 (and verifying it fails), then removing the 
> overrides one by one until it works.
I managed to get a NT4 CD and can acknowledge the issues you see. I am 
about to debug this now.
With -cpu host (on a AMD K8, similar to Michael's) I get to the point 
Michael mentioned:
  Microsoft (R) Windows NT (TM) Version 4.0 (Build 1381).
  1 System Processor [512 MB Memory]  Multiprocessor Kernel
Then it _seems_ to hang, checking for getting beyond a certain TSC value 
in a tight loop.
(rdtsc; cmp %edx, %edi; ja @rdtsc; jb bailout; cmp %eax, %ebx; ja 
@rdtsdc; bailout:)
But after some time (when I got back from the monitor, but also without 
going into) I could proceed with the installation.
Michael, can you confirm this?
I will now try to get behind the STOP 3E error.

Regards,
Andre.

-- 
Andre Przywara
AMD-Operating System Research Center (OSRC), Dresden, Germany
Tel: +49 351 448-3567-12

Re: Booting/installing WindowsNT

[Michael Tokarev]

Andre Przywara wrote:
[]
> I managed to get a NT4 CD and can acknowledge the issues you see. I am
> about to debug this now.
> With -cpu host (on a AMD K8, similar to Michael's) I get to the point
> Michael mentioned:
>  Microsoft (R) Windows NT (TM) Version 4.0 (Build 1381).
>  1 System Processor [512 MB Memory]  Multiprocessor Kernel
> Then it _seems_ to hang, checking for getting beyond a certain TSC value
> in a tight loop.
> (rdtsc; cmp %edx, %edi; ja @rdtsc; jb bailout; cmp %eax, %ebx; ja
> @rdtsdc; bailout:)
> But after some time (when I got back from the monitor, but also without
> going into) I could proceed with the installation.
> Michael, can you confirm this?

I've seen 3 variants here so far:

1.  normal installation.  It stops for a while after that kernel
  message you mentioned.  For several secodns, mabye even 20
  seconds.  And after a while it continues.  During all this
  time the guest cpu usage is 100% like you describe (a tight
  loop).  This is what I call "working" - I never bothered to
  think if that tight loop/pause is normal or not.  This is
  what happens for me with -cpu host.

2. with -cpu pentium it also displays that kernel message but
  stops here without any cpu usage whatsoever.  I waited for
  some 40 minutes at one point (I just forgot I started it but
  later on noticed there's a QEMU window floating around with
  that NT kernel message on it and nothing happening).

3.  In all other cases so far it BSoDs with STOP 0x3E error
  right before displaying that kernel message.

So.. I'm not sure if it's confirmation or not :)

Thanks!

/mjt

Re: Booting/installing WindowsNT

[Andre Przywara]

Michael Tokarev wrote:
  > I've seen 3 variants here so far:
> 
> 1.  normal installation.  It stops for a while after that kernel
>   message you mentioned.  For several secodns, mabye even 20
>   seconds.  And after a while it continues.  During all this
>   time the guest cpu usage is 100% like you describe (a tight
>   loop).  This is what I call "working" - I never bothered to
>   think if that tight loop/pause is normal or not.  This is
>   what happens for me with -cpu host.
OK, I see that, too.

> 2. with -cpu pentium it also displays that kernel message but
>   stops here without any cpu usage whatsoever.  I waited for
>   some 40 minutes at one point (I just forgot I started it but
>   later on noticed there's a QEMU window floating around with
>   that NT kernel message on it and nothing happening).
Agreed. It stucks in a sti;hlt;ret, obviously waiting in vain for an 
interrupt. Interestingly it works with -smp 2. Will further investigate.

> 3.  In all other cases so far it BSoDs with STOP 0x3E error
>   right before displaying that kernel message.
MSDN talks about a mulitprocessor configuration error:
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms819006.aspx
I suspected the offline CPUs in the mptable that confuse NT. But -smp 
1,maxcpus=1 does not make a difference. I will try to dig deeper in this 
area.

> So.. I'm not sure if it's confirmation or not :)
I take this as one. Thanks for the clarification.

Regards,
Andre.

-- 
Andre Przywara
AMD-Operating System Research Center (OSRC), Dresden, Germany
Tel: +49 351 488-3567-12

Re: Booting/installing WindowsNT

[Avi Kivity]

On 05/04/2010 06:27 PM, Andre Przywara wrote:
>
>> 3.  In all other cases so far it BSoDs with STOP 0x3E error
>>   right before displaying that kernel message.
> MSDN talks about a mulitprocessor configuration error:
> http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms819006.aspx
> I suspected the offline CPUs in the mptable that confuse NT. But -smp 
> 1,maxcpus=1 does not make a difference. I will try to dig deeper in 
> this area.
>

What about disabling ACPI?  smp should still work through the mptable.

-- 
error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function

Re: Booting/installing WindowsNT

[Michael Tokarev]

04.05.2010 20:23, Avi Kivity wrote:
> On 05/04/2010 06:27 PM, Andre Przywara wrote:
>>
>>> 3. In all other cases so far it BSoDs with STOP 0x3E error
>>> right before displaying that kernel message.
>> MSDN talks about a mulitprocessor configuration error:
>> http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms819006.aspx
>> I suspected the offline CPUs in the mptable that confuse NT. But -smp
>> 1,maxcpus=1 does not make a difference. I will try to dig deeper in
>> this area.
>
> What about disabling ACPI? smp should still work through the mptable.

That was the first thing I tried in my initial testing.
Apparently ACPI has nothing to do with the problem, --
-no-acpi has no visible effect, the behavour is still
the same.

/mjt

Re: Booting/installing WindowsNT

[Andre Przywara]

Avi Kivity wrote:
> On 05/04/2010 06:27 PM, Andre Przywara wrote:
>>
>>> 3.  In all other cases so far it BSoDs with STOP 0x3E error
>>>   right before displaying that kernel message.
>> MSDN talks about a mulitprocessor configuration error:
>> http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms819006.aspx
>> I suspected the offline CPUs in the mptable that confuse NT. But -smp 
>> 1,maxcpus=1 does not make a difference. I will try to dig deeper in 
>> this area.
OK, I tackled this down. It is the max CPUID level that differs.
In the AMD CPUID guide leafs 0000_0002 till 0000_0004 are reserved, the 
CPU that Michael and I used (K8RevF) actually have a max leaf of 1 here.
Default qemu64 has a max leaf of 4.
So by saying -cpu qemu64,level=1 (or 2 or 3) it works for me.
Modern OS only read leaf 4 on Intel systems, it seems that NT4 is 
missing this.
I will now think about a proper fix for this.

> What about disabling ACPI?  smp should still work through the mptable.
Didn't make a difference.

Regards,
Andre.


-- 
Andre Przywara
AMD-Operating System Research Center (OSRC), Dresden, Germany
Tel: +49 351 448-3567-12

Re: Booting/installing WindowsNT

[Avi Kivity]

On 05/05/2010 11:32 AM, Andre Przywara wrote:
> Avi Kivity wrote:
>> On 05/04/2010 06:27 PM, Andre Przywara wrote:
>>>
>>>> 3.  In all other cases so far it BSoDs with STOP 0x3E error
>>>>   right before displaying that kernel message.
>>> MSDN talks about a mulitprocessor configuration error:
>>> http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms819006.aspx
>>> I suspected the offline CPUs in the mptable that confuse NT. But 
>>> -smp 1,maxcpus=1 does not make a difference. I will try to dig 
>>> deeper in this area.
> OK, I tackled this down. It is the max CPUID level that differs.
> In the AMD CPUID guide leafs 0000_0002 till 0000_0004 are reserved, 
> the CPU that Michael and I used (K8RevF) actually have a max leaf of 1 
> here.
> Default qemu64 has a max leaf of 4.
> So by saying -cpu qemu64,level=1 (or 2 or 3) it works for me.
> Modern OS only read leaf 4 on Intel systems, it seems that NT4 is 
> missing this.
> I will now think about a proper fix for this.

I don't understand.  Shouldn't the values for cpuid leaf 4 be the same 
for qemu64 whether the cpu is Intel or AMD?  The real cpuid shouldn't 
matter.


-- 
error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function

Re: Booting/installing WindowsNT

[Michael Tokarev]

05.05.2010 12:32, Andre Przywara wrote:
> Avi Kivity wrote:
>> On 05/04/2010 06:27 PM, Andre Przywara wrote:
>>>
>>>> 3. In all other cases so far it BSoDs with STOP 0x3E error
>>>> right before displaying that kernel message.
>>> MSDN talks about a mulitprocessor configuration error:
>>> http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms819006.aspx
>>> I suspected the offline CPUs in the mptable that confuse NT. But -smp
>>> 1,maxcpus=1 does not make a difference. I will try to dig deeper in
>>> this area.
> OK, I tackled this down. It is the max CPUID level that differs.
> In the AMD CPUID guide leafs 0000_0002 till 0000_0004 are reserved, the
> CPU that Michael and I used (K8RevF) actually have a max leaf of 1 here.
> Default qemu64 has a max leaf of 4.
> So by saying -cpu qemu64,level=1 (or 2 or 3) it works for me.
> Modern OS only read leaf 4 on Intel systems, it seems that NT4 is
> missing this.

Confirmed, with -cpu qemu64,level=[123] it works for me as well.

Note again that after service pack 6 (I haven't tried other SPs),
the problem goes away entirely -- winNT SP6 works with the default
kvm cpu just fine.

Thanks!

/mjt

Re: Booting/installing WindowsNT

[Andre Przywara]

Avi Kivity wrote:
> On 05/05/2010 11:32 AM, Andre Przywara wrote:
>> Avi Kivity wrote:
>>> On 05/04/2010 06:27 PM, Andre Przywara wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> 3.  In all other cases so far it BSoDs with STOP 0x3E error
>>>>>   right before displaying that kernel message.
>>>> MSDN talks about a mulitprocessor configuration error:
>>>> http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms819006.aspx
>>>> I suspected the offline CPUs in the mptable that confuse NT. But 
>>>> -smp 1,maxcpus=1 does not make a difference. I will try to dig 
>>>> deeper in this area.
>> OK, I tackled this down. It is the max CPUID level that differs.
>> In the AMD CPUID guide leafs 0000_0002 till 0000_0004 are reserved, 
>> the CPU that Michael and I used (K8RevF) actually have a max leaf of 1 
>> here.
>> Default qemu64 has a max leaf of 4.
>> So by saying -cpu qemu64,level=1 (or 2 or 3) it works for me.
>> Modern OS only read leaf 4 on Intel systems, it seems that NT4 is 
>> missing this.
>> I will now think about a proper fix for this.
> 
> I don't understand.  Shouldn't the values for cpuid leaf 4 be the same 
> for qemu64 whether the cpu is Intel or AMD?  The real cpuid shouldn't 
> matter.
Yes, but if the max leaf value is smaller than 4, then the guest will 
not read it. It seems that NT does not like the entries returned by KVM 
for leaf 4. I am about to find out what exactly is causing that.
I have the theory that the stop is intentional as NT4 workstation does 
not _want_ to support certain SMP configurations (more than 2 
processors?) I have seen similar issue with WinXPPro and -smp 4 (which 
went away with -smp 4,cores=4).

Regards,
Andre.

-- 
Andre Przywara
AMD-Operating System Research Center (OSRC), Dresden, Germany
Tel: +49 351 448-3567-12

Re: Booting/installing WindowsNT

[Avi Kivity]

On 05/05/2010 11:51 AM, Michael Tokarev wrote:
>> In the AMD CPUID guide leafs 0000_0002 till 0000_0004 are reserved, the
>> CPU that Michael and I used (K8RevF) actually have a max leaf of 1 here.
>> Default qemu64 has a max leaf of 4.
>> So by saying -cpu qemu64,level=1 (or 2 or 3) it works for me.
>> Modern OS only read leaf 4 on Intel systems, it seems that NT4 is
>> missing this.
> OK, I tackled this down. It is the max CPUID level that differs.
>
> Confirmed, with -cpu qemu64,level=[123] it works for me as well.
>
> Note again that after service pack 6 (I haven't tried other SPs),
> the problem goes away entirely -- winNT SP6 works with the default
> kvm cpu just fine.

Interesting, may be a guest bug that was fixed later.

-- 
error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function

Re: Booting/installing WindowsNT

[Andre Przywara]

Michael Tokarev wrote:
> 05.05.2010 12:32, Andre Przywara wrote:
>> Avi Kivity wrote:
>>> On 05/04/2010 06:27 PM, Andre Przywara wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> 3. In all other cases so far it BSoDs with STOP 0x3E error
>>>>> right before displaying that kernel message.
>>>> MSDN talks about a mulitprocessor configuration error:
>>>> http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms819006.aspx
>>>> I suspected the offline CPUs in the mptable that confuse NT. But -smp
>>>> 1,maxcpus=1 does not make a difference. I will try to dig deeper in
>>>> this area.
>> OK, I tackled this down. It is the max CPUID level that differs.
>> In the AMD CPUID guide leafs 0000_0002 till 0000_0004 are reserved, the
>> CPU that Michael and I used (K8RevF) actually have a max leaf of 1 here.
>> Default qemu64 has a max leaf of 4.
>> So by saying -cpu qemu64,level=1 (or 2 or 3) it works for me.
>> Modern OS only read leaf 4 on Intel systems, it seems that NT4 is
>> missing this.
> 
> Confirmed, with -cpu qemu64,level=[123] it works for me as well.
The strange thing is that NT4 never reads leaf 4:
kvm-2341  [003]   228.527874: kvm_cpuid: func 40000000 rax 0 rbx 
4b4d564b rcx 564b4d56 rdx 4d
kvm-2341  [003]   228.530033: kvm_cpuid: func 1 rax 623 rbx 800 rcx 
80002001 rdx 78bfbfd
kvm-2341  [003]   228.530081: kvm_cpuid: func 80000000 rax 8000000a rbx 
68747541 rcx 444d4163 rdx 69746e65
kvm-2341  [003]   228.530084: kvm_cpuid: func 80000008 rax 3028 rbx 0 
rcx 0 rdx 0
kvm-2341  [003]   228.530147: kvm_cpuid: func 1 rax 623 rbx 800 rcx 
80002001 rdx 78bfbfd
kvm-2341  [002]   228.538254: kvm_cpuid: func 1 rax 623 rbx 800 rcx 
80002001 rdx 78bfbfd
kvm-2341  [002]   228.539902: kvm_cpuid: func 1 rax 623 rbx 800 rcx 
80002001 rdx 78bfbfd
kvm-2341  [002]   236.273370: kvm_cpuid: func 1 rax 623 rbx 800 rcx 
80002001 rdx 78bfbfd
kvm-2341  [002]   236.273381: kvm_cpuid: func 0 rax 4 rbx 68747541 rcx 
444d4163 rdx 69746e65

With level=4 it BSODs afterwards, with level=1 it beyond that:
kvm-2472  [002]   871.379192: kvm_cpuid: func 1 rax 623 rbx 800 rcx 
80002001 rdx 78bfbfd
kvm-2472  [002]   871.379235: kvm_cpuid: func 0 rax 1 rbx 68747541 rcx 
444d4163 rdx 69746e65
kvm-2472  [002]   871.379238: kvm_cpuid: func 1 rax 623 rbx 800 rcx 
80002001 rdx 78bfbfd
....

Interestingly it also accesses leaf 8000_0008, I thought that that leaf 
wasn't around in 1996.

> 
> Note again that after service pack 6 (I haven't tried other SPs),
> the problem goes away entirely -- winNT SP6 works with the default
> kvm cpu just fine.
I agree with Avi that it looks like a bug to me. I will see if I can 
learn more about it.

Regards,
Andre.

-- 
Andre Przywara
AMD-Operating System Research Center (OSRC), Dresden, Germany
Tel: +49 351 448-3567-12

Re: Booting/installing WindowsNT

[Avi Kivity]

On 05/05/2010 01:18 PM, Andre Przywara wrote:
> Michael Tokarev wrote:
>> 05.05.2010 12:32, Andre Przywara wrote:
>>> Avi Kivity wrote:
>>>> On 05/04/2010 06:27 PM, Andre Przywara wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> 3. In all other cases so far it BSoDs with STOP 0x3E error
>>>>>> right before displaying that kernel message.
>>>>> MSDN talks about a mulitprocessor configuration error:
>>>>> http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms819006.aspx
>>>>> I suspected the offline CPUs in the mptable that confuse NT. But -smp
>>>>> 1,maxcpus=1 does not make a difference. I will try to dig deeper in
>>>>> this area.
>>> OK, I tackled this down. It is the max CPUID level that differs.
>>> In the AMD CPUID guide leafs 0000_0002 till 0000_0004 are reserved, the
>>> CPU that Michael and I used (K8RevF) actually have a max leaf of 1 
>>> here.
>>> Default qemu64 has a max leaf of 4.
>>> So by saying -cpu qemu64,level=1 (or 2 or 3) it works for me.
>>> Modern OS only read leaf 4 on Intel systems, it seems that NT4 is
>>> missing this.
>>
>> Confirmed, with -cpu qemu64,level=[123] it works for me as well.
> The strange thing is that NT4 never reads leaf 4:
> kvm-2341  [003]   228.527874: kvm_cpuid: func 40000000 rax 0 rbx 
> 4b4d564b rcx 564b4d56 rdx 4d
> kvm-2341  [003]   228.530033: kvm_cpuid: func 1 rax 623 rbx 800 rcx 
> 80002001 rdx 78bfbfd
> kvm-2341  [003]   228.530081: kvm_cpuid: func 80000000 rax 8000000a 
> rbx 68747541 rcx 444d4163 rdx 69746e65
> kvm-2341  [003]   228.530084: kvm_cpuid: func 80000008 rax 3028 rbx 0 
> rcx 0 rdx 0
> kvm-2341  [003]   228.530147: kvm_cpuid: func 1 rax 623 rbx 800 rcx 
> 80002001 rdx 78bfbfd
> kvm-2341  [002]   228.538254: kvm_cpuid: func 1 rax 623 rbx 800 rcx 
> 80002001 rdx 78bfbfd
> kvm-2341  [002]   228.539902: kvm_cpuid: func 1 rax 623 rbx 800 rcx 
> 80002001 rdx 78bfbfd
> kvm-2341  [002]   236.273370: kvm_cpuid: func 1 rax 623 rbx 800 rcx 
> 80002001 rdx 78bfbfd
> kvm-2341  [002]   236.273381: kvm_cpuid: func 0 rax 4 rbx 68747541 rcx 
> 444d4163 rdx 69746e65

So maybe it's just a simple guest bug that was never encountered in real 
life because no processors had that leaf.

>
> With level=4 it BSODs afterwards, with level=1 it beyond that:
> kvm-2472  [002]   871.379192: kvm_cpuid: func 1 rax 623 rbx 800 rcx 
> 80002001 rdx 78bfbfd
> kvm-2472  [002]   871.379235: kvm_cpuid: func 0 rax 1 rbx 68747541 rcx 
> 444d4163 rdx 69746e65
> kvm-2472  [002]   871.379238: kvm_cpuid: func 1 rax 623 rbx 800 rcx 
> 80002001 rdx 78bfbfd
> ....
>
> Interestingly it also accesses leaf 8000_0008, I thought that that 
> leaf wasn't around in 1996.

It's the bios:
src/mtrr.c:            cpuid(0x80000008u, &eax, &ebx, &ecx, &edx);


-- 
error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function