From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.8 required=3.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E83C8C2D0DB for ; Wed, 22 Jan 2020 16:06:59 +0000 (UTC) Received: from lists.gnu.org (lists.gnu.org [209.51.188.17]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BD8C12465B for ; Wed, 22 Jan 2020 16:06:59 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org BD8C12465B Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=bugs.launchpad.net Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=qemu-devel-bounces+qemu-devel=archiver.kernel.org@nongnu.org Received: from localhost ([::1]:43834 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1iuIWw-0002iU-V6 for qemu-devel@archiver.kernel.org; Wed, 22 Jan 2020 11:06:58 -0500 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:43589) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1iuIVk-0001oZ-DI for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 22 Jan 2020 11:05:45 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1iuIVj-00013M-5d for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 22 Jan 2020 11:05:44 -0500 Received: from indium.canonical.com ([91.189.90.7]:54070) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1iuIVj-000130-08 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 22 Jan 2020 11:05:43 -0500 Received: from loganberry.canonical.com ([91.189.90.37]) by indium.canonical.com with esmtp (Exim 4.86_2 #2 (Debian)) id 1iuIVh-0007Yv-JV for ; Wed, 22 Jan 2020 16:05:41 +0000 Received: from loganberry.canonical.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by loganberry.canonical.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 818DB2E80C8 for ; Wed, 22 Jan 2020 16:05:41 +0000 (UTC) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Date: Wed, 22 Jan 2020 15:58:31 -0000 From: Daniel Berrange <1860575@bugs.launchpad.net> To: qemu-devel@nongnu.org X-Launchpad-Notification-Type: bug X-Launchpad-Bug: product=qemu; status=New; importance=Undecided; assignee=None; X-Launchpad-Bug-Information-Type: Public X-Launchpad-Bug-Private: no X-Launchpad-Bug-Security-Vulnerability: no X-Launchpad-Bug-Commenters: berrange lemonboy X-Launchpad-Bug-Reporter: The Lemon Man (lemonboy) X-Launchpad-Bug-Modifier: Daniel Berrange (berrange) References: <157970748795.4848.1694391096642821939.malonedeb@chaenomeles.canonical.com> Message-Id: <157970871114.4879.13125884642613054475.malone@soybean.canonical.com> Subject: [Bug 1860575] Re: qemu64 CPU model is incorrect X-Launchpad-Message-Rationale: Subscriber (QEMU) @qemu-devel-ml X-Launchpad-Message-For: qemu-devel-ml Precedence: bulk X-Generated-By: Launchpad (canonical.com); Revision="b8d1327fd820d6bf500589d6da587d5037c7d88e"; Instance="production-secrets-lazr.conf" X-Launchpad-Hash: 7122e6f2bfb8ccedb7f96d9852471a3422977ffc X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] [fuzzy] X-Received-From: 91.189.90.7 X-BeenThere: qemu-devel@nongnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Reply-To: Bug 1860575 <1860575@bugs.launchpad.net> Errors-To: qemu-devel-bounces+qemu-devel=archiver.kernel.org@nongnu.org Sender: "Qemu-devel" Your analysis of the problem with family makes sense & we do have mechanism to fix this in QEMU while keeping back compat for existing deployments. I'm curious as to the actual errors LLVM reports ? FWIW, even though qemu64 is the default CPU, practically everyone would be better off choosing one of the other CPU models explicitly to better suit their desired use case. There is some guidance here https://qemu.weilnetz.de/doc/qemu-doc.html#cpu_005fmodels -- = You received this bug notification because you are a member of qemu- devel-ml, which is subscribed to QEMU. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1860575 Title: qemu64 CPU model is incorrect Status in QEMU: New Bug description: At the moment the "qemu64" CPU is defined as follows: ``` .vendor =3D CPUID_VENDOR_AMD, .family =3D 6, .model =3D 6, .stepping =3D 3, ``` According to Wikipedia [1] this means the CPU is defined as part of the K7 family while the AMD64 ISA was only introduced with the K8 series! This causes some software such as LLVM to notice the problem (32-bit cpu with 64-bit capability reported in the cpuid flag) and produce various error messages. The simple solution would be to upgrade this definition to use the Sledge= hammer family (15) instead. = [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_AMD_CPU_microarchitectures To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/qemu/+bug/1860575/+subscriptions