WARNING - OLD ARCHIVES

This is an archived copy of the Xen.org mailing list, which we have preserved to ensure that existing links to archives are not broken. The live archive, which contains the latest emails, can be found at http://lists.xen.org/
   
 
 
Xen 
 
Home Products Support Community News
 
   
 

xen-devel

Re: [Xen-devel] [RFC][PATCH 1/6] HVM PCI Passthrough (non-IOMMU)

To: Guy Zana <guy@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] [RFC][PATCH 1/6] HVM PCI Passthrough (non-IOMMU)
From: Muli Ben-Yehuda <muli@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 5 Jun 2007 09:37:01 +0300
Cc: xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Delivery-date: Mon, 04 Jun 2007 23:35:14 -0700
Envelope-to: www-data@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <9392A06CB0FDC847B3A530B3DC174E7B02ADCCF7@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
List-help: <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=help>
List-id: Xen developer discussion <xen-devel.lists.xensource.com>
List-post: <mailto:xen-devel@lists.xensource.com>
List-subscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=subscribe>
List-unsubscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=unsubscribe>
References: <20070604182530.GD4556@xxxxxxxxxxxx> <9392A06CB0FDC847B3A530B3DC174E7B02ADCCF7@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sender: xen-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.11
On Mon, Jun 04, 2007 at 05:43:02PM -0400, Guy Zana wrote:
>  
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Muli Ben-Yehuda [mailto:muli@xxxxxxxxxx] 
> > Sent: Monday, June 04, 2007 9:26 PM
> > To: Guy Zana
> > Cc: xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] [RFC][PATCH 1/6] HVM PCI Passthrough 
> > (non-IOMMU)
> > 
> > > +
> > > +# PCI pass-through flags
> > > +mapping_1to1 ?= y
> > > +passthrough ?= y
> > 
> > Does one make sense without the other?
> 
> Actually yes, you'll need the 1:1 layout only when using devices
> that needs DMA.  Just the passthorugh switch could be turned on for
> other devices...

I think we take it as a given that passthrough (whether through 1:1 or
IOMMU support) will be compiled into Xen, so no need for a separate
flag.

> > >  XEN_COMPILE_ARCH    ?= $(shell uname -m | sed -e s/i.86/x86_32/ \
> > >                           -e s/ppc/powerpc/ -e s/i86pc/x86_32/)
> > > @@ -9,7 +13,7 @@ XEN_OS              ?= $(shell uname -s)
> > >  XEN_OS              ?= $(shell uname -s)
> > >  
> > >  ifeq ($(XEN_TARGET_ARCH),x86_32)
> > > -XEN_TARGET_X86_PAE  ?= y
> > > +XEN_TARGET_X86_PAE  ?= n
> > 
> > Is there a dependency between 1-1 / passthrough and !PAE, or 
> > is this just for convenience?
> 
> There is a dependency, not that it's that a problem to support PAE,
> we just didn't implement it yet.  We decided to support x86_64 and
> remove the x86_32 / PAE support, as we see it, there is just no need
> to support x86_32 / PAE anymore...

Ok, just for reference, if there's a dependency in the future, it
should be expressed that way (only turn on PAE if 1:1 is on, in this
case).

> > >  endif
> > >  
> > >  CONFIG_$(XEN_OS) := y
> > > --- a/tools/Rules.mk      Sat May 05 13:48:05 2007 +0100
> > > +++ b/tools/Rules.mk      Thu May 31 21:04:53 2007 +0300
> > > @@ -13,6 +13,14 @@ X11_LDPATH = -L/usr/X11R6/$(LIBDIR)  
> > X11_LDPATH = 
> > > -L/usr/X11R6/$(LIBDIR)
> > >  
> > >  CFLAGS += -D__XEN_TOOLS__
> > > +
> > > +ifeq ($(passthrough),y)
> > > +    CFLAGS += -DCONFIG_NEO
> > > +endif
> > 
> > You probably want a better name than CONFIG_NEO, much to the 
> > disappointment of matrix fans everywhere.
> 
> Hehe :)
> It'll be removed completely.
> The 1:1 enabled layout will be controlled by a boot parameter.

Ok, good.

Cheers,
Muli

_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>