bhyve: svm (amd-v) update
Willem Jan Withagen
wjw at digiware.nl
Wed May 21 07:51:20 UTC 2014
On 2014-05-21 6:55, Anish wrote:
> Hi Willem,
> > I patch against bhyve_SVM, because in the later case I get
> complaints that
> This patch is to sync bhyve_svm project branch with HEAD @263780, so you
> have to first merge HEAD to bhyve_svm. It will prompt you to resolve
> conflict in amdv.c, you should accept the changes that are in bhyve_svm
> and then apply the patch. bhyve HEAD exposed vlapic
> related interfaces along with some other changes, this patch will enable
> vlapic interfaces for SVM.
I'd be interested in the vlapic to if that helps the speed.
But you can help me a lot if you give me the SVN commands to do what you
I can fetch a clean bhyve_svm brach, but that is as far as my svn goes.
I'll see if I can get my patches in as well.
> Thanks and regards,
> On Tue, May 20, 2014 at 2:03 PM, Willem Jan Withagen <wjw at digiware.nl
> <mailto:wjw at digiware.nl>> wrote:
> 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
> So I'm guessing that is against head.
> But last time I looked at head, more than just the interrupt stuff was
More information about the freebsd-virtualization