Date: Tue, 20 May 2014 23:03:08 +0200 From: Willem Jan Withagen <wjw@digiware.nl> To: Anish <akgupt3@gmail.com>, Andriy Gapon <avg@freebsd.org> Cc: Neel Natu <neel@freebsd.org>, FreeBSD virtualization <freebsd-virtualization@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: bhyve: svm (amd-v) update Message-ID: <537BC30C.4070208@digiware.nl> In-Reply-To: <CALnRwMRpwc=DHib%2BeooftCkSP_K6XtVuR11AceDYju=mMBE2%2Bw@mail.gmail.com> References: <53748481.8010108@FreeBSD.org> <CALnRwMRpwc=DHib%2BeooftCkSP_K6XtVuR11AceDYju=mMBE2%2Bw@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 15-5-2014 17:56, Anish wrote: > Hi Andriy, > Thanks for your interest in SVM port of bhyve. I do have patch to sync it > to http://svnweb.freebsd.org/base?view=revision&revision=263780(3/26). If > patches looks good to you, we can submit it. I have been testing it on > Phenom box which lacks some of newer SVM features. I don't quite understand against what this patch is? Do I run it over head, to get SVM code into head? Or do I patch against bhyve_SVM, because in the later case I get complaints that fatal error: 'vlapic_priv.h' file not found # locate vlapic_priv.h /usr/srcs/head/sys/amd64/vmm/io/vlapic_priv.h So I'm guessing that is against head. But last time I looked at head, more than just the interrupt stuff was missing.... --WjW
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?537BC30C.4070208>