64bit support is disabled by hardware xd bit

[AbiCgail]

I've troubleshot this till I’m blue in the appearance and require some guidance. I could jump at the chance to have BOTH hyper-v and VMware workstation 6 running on my Intel double-center framework and BOTH skilled for the purpose of running 64-digit VMs. Hyper-V needs BOTH VT back and XD touch (otherwise known as NX nibbled) back to be empowered (I’m not positive why they require XD/NX support). Yet, whenever I prepare the XD back from within the bios, my PC is no longer fit to run 64-cycle VMs within VMware.

[Crespin]

This is exceptionally odd. XD back is empowered by default on most stages, and it might as well not have any impact on 64-digit visitor support.

[Kickapoo]

There is not an inadequacy in the log that is promptly obvious to me. I have, be that as it may, joined several screens that show the VM powering on (and dissenting) and a screen shots failure from windows 2008 64-bit attempting to begin establishment. This same test works fine assuming that I debilitate XD touch in the bios (and, obviously, crippling XD handicaps Hyper-V). Hope this helps.

[Odalis]

VT capacity is reported by spot 5 of ECX in CPUID leaf 1. Regularly, for this processor, that cycle could be on. Yet, consistent with your log document:

hostCPUID level 00000001, 0: 0x000006fb 0x00020800 0x80006381 0x37cbfbff

ECX is the third entrance, and touch 5 (0x20) is off. All Intel processors with this family/model/stepping (clan 6, model 15, venturing 11) report that bit as on.

In consideration of this makes a point not to look similar to any delivery Intel processor, I could surmise that this is a Hyper-V virtual CPU. It gives the idea that you are attempting to run VMware Workstation in a Hyper-V virtual machine, but the Hyper-V virtual CPU tries not to back VT.

The XD uphold is a red herring. By crippling XD, you are incapacitating Hyper-V, which permits VMware Workstation to run on the physical machine. The physical CPU does support VT. In the event that you were to debilitate Hyper-V by some different implies, you ought to spot that you could probably empower XD and run 64-bit VMs under VMware Workstation.

[Algonkin]

What you need to do is to run VMware Workstation as a sibling of Hyper-V as opposed to as a youngster of Hyper-V. To do that, you could need to get accommodate from someone more acquainted with Hyper-V. Also, informative inform from the log is:
|msg.monitorInit.vmm64.initHost.IntelNoVT| This CPU tries not to back VT.
Actually, the CPU being referred to (i.e. the Hyper-V virtual CPU) positively makes a point not to back VT.

[Beothuk]

One more stride in the right heading, Virtual PC Guy (Ben Armstrong) has an online journal section specifying the Hyper-V mechanics which appears to demonstrate the Windows Server 2008's hypervisor is likewise reputed to be both the "Root Partition" and as the "Parent Partition".

[Delaware]

VT presents the notions of "root mode" execution and "non-root mode" execution. The hypervisor executes in root mode, and the visitors execute in non-root mode. In non-root mode, all VT directions trap out to the hypervisor and need to be copied. Since Hyper-V makes a point not to report the VT proficience in the virtual machine, it doubtlessly makes a point not to uphold the copying of VT guidelines. There is nothing that VMware Workstation can do to detour Hyper-V and access the physical fittings straightforwardly. Additionally, depending on if you ran Hyper-V inside VMware Workstation, it could need to make forego VT guidelines, in light of the fact that we don't imitate them either.

[Fox28]

Moreover, in addition what, in hypothesis, do I should do to run 64-cycle visitors. I was under the impression that VMware workstation (and server and ESX even) backed 64bit visitors before VT even existed). Now that its on the table, I possess a more senior 64bit AMD processor that runs 64-digit visitors yet has no VT uphold. This, in my case, could reasonable suffice for the sort of testing I require.

Much obliged again for the carried on dialogue. I'm recognizing this exceptionally valuable, as I'm old-fashioned ball on the engineering in across the board.

[Huron]

You are able to identify a delicate prologue to VT and an illustration with twofold interpretation in this ASPLOS paper. More itemized documentation is good to go in the Intel® 64 and IA-32 Architectures Software Developer's Manual Volume 3B: System Programming Guide. For 64-bit visitors, you require either "extended mode portion farthest point empower" (gave by some AMD64 CPUs) or EM64T and VT (furnished by some Intel CPUs). See KB 1901 for reference. Since Windows offers a routine to detour the hypervisor, that ought to work.

[Illinois]

I am able to tell from your log indexes that what you are attempting to do is not backed. If you don't mind peruse Running Nested VMs to grasp the constraints of settled VMs under Workstation 7. You cannot run 64-cycle settled VMs under any present VMware item.

[Iroquois]

I have commissioned ESX 4.1 & ESXi 4.1 to ponder. My fundamental concern is to institute 64bit VMA. In this way, I am able to pick up it.