xen-devel
Re: [Xen-devel] Re: APIC rework
To: |
"Zhang, Xiantao" <xiantao.zhang@xxxxxxxxx> |
Subject: |
Re: [Xen-devel] Re: APIC rework |
From: |
Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@xxxxxxxxxx> |
Date: |
Mon, 30 Nov 2009 09:34:19 -0500 |
Cc: |
Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@xxxxxxxx>, Xen-devel <xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, "Jiang, Yunhong" <yunhong.jiang@xxxxxxxxx>, "Han, Weidong" <weidong.han@xxxxxxxxx>, Keir@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, Fraser <keir.fraser@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
Delivery-date: |
Mon, 30 Nov 2009 06:36:07 -0800 |
Envelope-to: |
www-data@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx |
In-reply-to: |
<706158FABBBA044BAD4FE898A02E4BC201CD419656@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
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> <706158FABBBA044BAD4FE898A02E4BC201CD3A08EB@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20091125134144.GA2586@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <706158FABBBA044BAD4FE898A02E4BC201CD419316@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20091125180031.GA5531@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <706158FABBBA044BAD4FE898A02E4BC201CD419656@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
Sender: |
xen-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx |
User-agent: |
Mutt/1.5.19 (2009-01-05) |
> > During boot the device can be owned by pciback or by the modele for
> > which a
> > PCI entry exist. Look for pciback.hide entry.
> >
> > There are two modes of execution:
> > 1). First being what you described wherein the device initially
> > belogs to Dom0. The user unbinds it from the PCI device and
> > binds it to the pciback module. At that point, the device is
> > disabled and ready for PV guests. When a PV guest starts pciback
> > module makes the pci_enable_device call and sets the IRQ, etc
> > for the device (for MSI, it obviously gets the IDT value from
> > the hypervisor call). 2). Dom0 boots where the user specified on the
> > command line pciback.hide=(0000:01:03.1). The pciback owns the
> > device (is binded to it) and the native module that would load
> > for this PCI device is not called.
> >
> > It is correct that the unmapping/mapping and the ownership needs to
> > be dynamic. As user could bind to the pciback module, give it to
> > guest, kill the guest, then map the PCI device back to dom0, and
> > after that repeat the whole thing.
>
> If only the above two cases are needed to support, I think my patch should
> meet the requirement. This is because once the device is hidden by the
> pciback, the pirq unmap logic should be callled in both cases. So it the
> mapping for dom0 should be cleared in the operation, so there is not the
> issue you figured. :-)
Ah, what about maping the device to a guest? That is not neccessary? Or are you
saying that the PV guest should be making a hypervisor call to
PHYSDEVOP_map_pirq and
it will map the device itself? I thought those calls in the Hypervisor
were guarded by a IS_PRIV(xx) which would expel a PV guest. The other
complication is
that the PV guests have their own PCI subsystem (look in arch/x86/pci/xen.c)
which only calls 'xen_allocate_pirq' to setup the chip_data to xen_pirq_chip.
The next call the PV guest does is to startup_pirq.
> Xiantao
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Xen-devel mailing list
> Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
|
<Prev in Thread] |
Current Thread |
[Next in Thread>
|
- Re: [Xen-devel] Re: APIC rework, (continued)
- RE: [Xen-devel] Re: APIC rework, Zhang, Xiantao
- Re: [Xen-devel] Re: APIC rework, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk
- RE: [Xen-devel] Re: APIC rework, Zhang, Xiantao
- Re: [Xen-devel] Re: APIC rework, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk
- RE: [Xen-devel] Re: APIC rework, Zhang, Xiantao
- Re: [Xen-devel] Re: APIC rework,
Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <=
- Re: [Xen-devel] Re: APIC rework, Jeremy Fitzhardinge
- RE: [Xen-devel] Re: APIC rework, Zhang, Xiantao
- Re: [Xen-devel] Re: APIC rework, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk
- RE: [Xen-devel] Re: APIC rework, Zhang, Xiantao
- Re: [Xen-devel] Re: APIC rework, Jeremy Fitzhardinge
|
|
|