LinuxQuestions.org - [SOLVED] Is 64 bit working or not?

- Linux - Software (https://www.linuxquestions.org/questions/linux-software-2/)

- - Is 64 bit working or not? (https://www.linuxquestions.org/questions/linux-software-2/is-64-bit-working-or-not-4175440363/)

Is 64 bit working or not?

Hey all, I have a Toshiba Satellite laptop that's running OpenSuSE 12.2 64 bit:

Code:

jobee@Suba:~> uname -a

Linux Suba.site 3.4.11-2.16-desktop #1 SMP PREEMPT Wed Sep 26 17:05:00 UTC 2012 (259fc87) x86_64 x86_64 x86_64 GNU/Linux

jobee@Suba:~>

I downloaded VirtualBox AMD64 and installed it but no 64 bit options were available for VMs. I checked my BIOS and sure enough VT-x was turned off. I turned it back on and checked to see if my software could see the 64 bit hardware but no joy:

Code:

Suba:/home/jobee # egrep '(vmx|svm)' /proc/cpuinfo

Suba:/home/jobee #

I've been trying to find out if I need to recompile my kernel (something I've never done; yet) now that VT-x has been turned on but I can't find any information on it. I tried to find some information on just recompiling my current kernel but everything I see is for installing a new kernel. So 1) do I need to recompile my existing kernel now that VT-x is on and 2) where are some instructions for doing so?

Thanks,

Joe B

Quote:

Originally Posted by jbruyet (Post 4844207)

I turned it back on and checked to see if my software could see the 64 bit hardware but no joy:

Can you please describe what did happen?
Litterally nothing?
Have you tried a 32bit os, just to make sure it's specific to 64 bit operating systems?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Knightron (Post 4844218)

Can you please describe what did happen?

If you're asking for the steps, I pressed F2 on boot to get in to BIOS, under Virtualization I enabled VT-x and then exited BIOS and proceeded to boot my laptop.

Quote:

Litterally nothing?

There was no change in the operation of my laptop. At least nothing that I can see. In BIOS VT-x still shows as having been activated (I thought it might have turned off by itself). I've rebooted my laptop a couple of times and even power-cycled it but no joy.

Quote:

Have you tried a 32bit os, just to make sure it's specific to 64 bit operating systems

I just did an install of XP 32 bit and it installed without any problems.

Thanks,

Joe B

No, what i mean is; what happens when you try to boot the 64 bit os in Virtualbox?

Quote:

Originally Posted by jbruyet (Post 4844207)

...and checked to see if my software could see the 64 bit hardware but no joy:

Code:

Suba:/home/jobee # egrep '(vmx|svm)' /proc/cpuinfo

Suba:/home/jobee #

That checks your processor, not software. Post the results of:

Code:

cat /proc/cpuinfo

@knightron, I haven't installed it because I don't get an option to install a 64 bit OS. On my desktop I've installed VirtualBox and when I go to create a new VM I get 64 bit options for OS installs.

@brianL

Code:

jobee@linux-had2:~> cat /proc/cpuinfo

processor        : 0

vendor_id        : GenuineIntel

cpu family        : 6

model                : 37

model name        : Intel(R) Pentium(R) CPU        P6200  @ 2.13GHz

stepping        : 5

microcode        : 0x3

cpu MHz                : 933.000

cache size        : 3072 KB

physical id        : 0

siblings        : 2

core id                : 0

cpu cores        : 2

apicid                : 0

initial apicid        : 0

fpu                : yes

fpu_exception        : yes

cpuid level        : 11

wp                : yes

flags                : fpu vme de pse tsc msr pae mce cx8 apic sep mtrr pge mca cmov pat pse36 clflush dts acpi mmx fxsr sse sse2 ss ht tm pbe syscall nx rdtscp lm constant_tsc arch_perfmon pebs bts nopl xtopology nonstop_tsc aperfmperf pni dtes64 monitor ds_cpl est tm2 ssse3 cx16 xtpr pdcm pcid popcnt lahf_lm arat dtherm

bogomips        : 4256.25

clflush size        : 64

cache_alignment        : 64

address sizes        : 36 bits physical, 48 bits virtual

power management:



processor        : 1

vendor_id        : GenuineIntel

cpu family        : 6

model                : 37

model name        : Intel(R) Pentium(R) CPU        P6200  @ 2.13GHz

stepping        : 5

microcode        : 0x3

cpu MHz                : 933.000

cache size        : 3072 KB

physical id        : 0

siblings        : 2

core id                : 2

cpu cores        : 2

apicid                : 4

initial apicid        : 4

fpu                : yes

fpu_exception        : yes

cpuid level        : 11

wp                : yes

flags                : fpu vme de pse tsc msr pae mce cx8 apic sep mtrr pge mca cmov pat pse36 clflush dts acpi mmx fxsr sse sse2 ss ht tm pbe syscall nx rdtscp lm constant_tsc arch_perfmon pebs bts nopl xtopology nonstop_tsc aperfmperf pni dtes64 monitor ds_cpl est tm2 ssse3 cx16 xtpr pdcm pcid popcnt lahf_lm arat dtherm

bogomips        : 4256.25

clflush size        : 64

cache_alignment        : 64

address sizes        : 36 bits physical, 48 bits virtual

power management:



jobee@linux-had2:~>

Thanks,

Joe B

Odd - very odd.
The virtualization extensions are strictly not related to 64-bit, although these days they can be considered synonymous.

The "lm" options shows you have 64-bit hardware, but no vmx. Re-compile is unlikely to help I would think. What model CPU is that ?.

Quote:

Originally Posted by syg00 (Post 4845002)

What model CPU is that ?.

Is there a different parameter I can use to pull the CPU model out of /etc/cpuinfo?

Thanks,

Joe B

As far as i can find the P6200 does not support any form of virtualization technologies. And therefore does not support 64bit virtual machines or any other form of resource sharing.

Source:
http://ark.intel.com/products/50176/...Cache-2_13-GHz

I am sorry to inform you that your BIOS played a dirty mindtrick on you leading you to believe VT-x can be enabled.
Your best bet would be running 32 bit virtual machines, or getting a new CPU/System to run virtual machines on (since i am no fan of using non Virtualization supported systems with Virtual machines)

Well, I did an OS reinstall hoping to say you are wrong but I can't. I checked out the Intel article and that just drove it home for me. Sounds like dual-booting will have to work after all.

Thanks everyone,

Joe B