On Thu, Mar 19, 2015 at 03:02:27PM -0300, Eduardo Habkost wrote:
On Mon, Mar 16, 2015 at 10:24:51AM +0000, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
On Fri, Mar 13, 2015 at 04:09:57PM -0300, Eduardo Habkost wrote:
With the Intel microcode update that removed HLE and RTM, there will be different kinds of Haswell and Broadwell CPUs out there: some that still have the HLE and RTM features, and some that don't have the HLE and RTM features. On both cases people may be willing to use the pc-*-2.3 machine-types.
So, to cover both cases, introduce Haswell-noTSX and Broadwell-noTSX CPU models, for hosts that have Haswell and Broadwell CPUs without TSX support.
Signed-off-by: Eduardo Habkost <ehabkost@redhat.com>
The addition of Haswell-noTSX looks good to me.
I'm unclear on whether we truely need Broadwell-noTSX though. Did Intel actually ship any Broadwell production silicon in which the microcode disables this feature, or was it only a problem on pre-production samples of Broadwell ? If the latter, I'd say we don't need to have a Broadwell-noTSX model added. Perhaps Jun/Don can confirm from Intel's side.
I've talked to Don and Jun, and they confirmed that a Broadwell-noTSX CPU model will be needed, too.
I see some Broadwell CPUs without TSX-NI on ark.intel.com, too, so the TSX errata wouldn't be the only reason for needing the -noTSX model.
Ok, your patch looks good. Reviewed-by: Daniel P. Berrange <berrange@redhat.com> Regards, Daniel -- |: http://berrange.com -o- http://www.flickr.com/photos/dberrange/ :| |: http://libvirt.org -o- http://virt-manager.org :| |: http://autobuild.org -o- http://search.cpan.org/~danberr/ :| |: http://entangle-photo.org -o- http://live.gnome.org/gtk-vnc :|