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/
Home Products Support Community News


RE: [Xen-devel] Re: APIC rework

To: Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@xxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: RE: [Xen-devel] Re: APIC rework
From: "Zhang, Xiantao" <xiantao.zhang@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 25 Nov 2009 10:43:47 +0800
Accept-language: en-US
Acceptlanguage: en-US
Cc: Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@xxxxxxxx>, Xen-devel <xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, "Han, Weidong" <weidong.han@xxxxxxxxx>, Keir Fraser <keir.fraser@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, "Jiang, Yunhong" <yunhong.jiang@xxxxxxxxx>
Delivery-date: Tue, 24 Nov 2009 18:44:11 -0800
Envelope-to: www-data@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <20091124194401.GA29566@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
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/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=subscribe>
List-unsubscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=unsubscribe>
References: <706158FABBBA044BAD4FE898A02E4BC201CD3207E0@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <C72970BC.C323%keir.fraser@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> <706158FABBBA044BAD4FE898A02E4BC201CD3A074E@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20091124194401.GA29566@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sender: xen-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Thread-index: AcptPpN58MdbnHUkSyCtHbA1LkJGTQAOkvCw
Thread-topic: [Xen-devel] Re: APIC rework
Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:
>> At least dom0 parses this info from DSDT, so we can't have the
>> assuption whether it is used or not, I think. And I also agree to
>> add a new physdev_op to handle this case, and it should be better
>> way to go.   
>> Based on this idea, I worked out the patch, attached!  In this
>> patch, we introduced a new physdev_op PHYSDEVOP_setup_gsi for each
>> GSI setup, and each domain can require to map each GSI in this case.
>> In addition, I believe it is very safe to port the hypervisor patch
>> to xen-3.4-x tree and keeps pv_ops dom0 running on it, since no
>> logic is changed.  BTW, I also tested apic and non-apic cases, they
>> works fine after applying the patches.   
> But I don't think you tested PCI front and PCI back.
> Mainly these lines worry me (can you inline the patch next time too,
> please): 
> +               map_irq.domid = DOMID_SELF;
> +               map_irq.type = MAP_PIRQ_TYPE_GSI;
> +               map_irq.index = gsi;
> +               map_irq.pirq = irq;
> +               rc = HYPERVISOR_physdev_op(PHYSDEVOP_map_pirq,
> &map_irq); 
> For PCI passthrough to work, the domid needs to be for the guest
> domain, while in this case it is set to Dom0.
> There is already a method of extracting the domain id for PCI devices
> passed to the guest. Look in the 'xen_create_msi_irq' function.

Could you detail the concern ?  This hypercall is only related to GSI, not MSI, 
why it has side-effect about pci passthrough ? 


Xen-devel mailing list

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