From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Avi Kivity <avi@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: KVM on Via Nano (Isaiah) CPUs?
Date: Sat, 09 May 2009 12:32:53 +0300
Message-ID: <4A054DC5.2050406@redhat.com>
References: <20090509041641.77B58582C@rmail.inner.net>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: kvm@vger.kernel.org, andreas.tanz@kvt.de
To: Craig Metz <cmetz@inner.net>
Return-path: <kvm-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: from mx2.redhat.com ([66.187.237.31]:50814 "EHLO mx2.redhat.com"
	rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP
	id S1751144AbZEIJc7 (ORCPT <rfc822;kvm@vger.kernel.org>);
	Sat, 9 May 2009 05:32:59 -0400
In-Reply-To: <20090509041641.77B58582C@rmail.inner.net>
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.

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