Date: Thu, 20 Sep 2012 02:24:04 +0400 From: Yuri Pankov <yuri.pankov@gmail.com> To: Garrett Cooper <yanegomi@gmail.com> Cc: Ian Lepore <freebsd@damnhippie.dyndns.org>, lev@freebsd.org, freebsd-current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Latest -CURRENT/i386 could not start under VirutalBox 4.1.18 and 4.2 (Windows host): hangs up after atrtc0 detection Message-ID: <505A4604.5030306@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <CAGH67wS0pKmEjbHMH3dFPqkzTbEx6tFgBOKzWxGXHfDtap=iGw@mail.gmail.com> References: <80840563.20120920002200@serebryakov.spb.ru> <1252171344.20120920003724@serebryakov.spb.ru> <1348087584.95562.55.camel@revolution.hippie.lan> <CAGH67wS0pKmEjbHMH3dFPqkzTbEx6tFgBOKzWxGXHfDtap=iGw@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, 19 Sep 2012 14:57:30 -0700, Garrett Cooper wrote: > On Wed, Sep 19, 2012 at 1:46 PM, Ian Lepore > <freebsd@damnhippie.dyndns.org> wrote: > > ... > >> Yes, exactly. I updated the PR to request that my patch not get >> committed because it locks up virtualbox. I hope to find time soon to >> learn enough about installing/configuring virtualbox to figure out what >> the problem is (offhand,I suspect it hangs in the loop that probes for >> the need to re-index, because vbox doesn't quite emulate the hardware >> behavior fully). > > Why not just detect VBox and disable that functionality? VMware at > least has a sane way of determining whether or not you're running it > based on the SMBios ident.. VMware (as well as KVM and Xen) provides reliable way to detect its presence by checking "hypervisor present" CPUID's bit or accessing its I/O port, while VirtualBox doesn't do that, and matching SMBios ident doesn't seem to be really useful. Are there better and reliable ways of detecting VirtualBox?
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?505A4604.5030306>