Re: [PATCH] Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] Std VGA Performance

To:	"Keir Fraser" <Keir.Fraser@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject:	Re: [PATCH] Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] Std VGA Performance
From:	"Robert Phillips" <rsphillips@xxxxxxxxx>
Date:	Wed, 31 Oct 2007 15:28:25 -0400
Cc:	xen-devel <xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Ben Guthro <bguthro@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Alex Williamson <alex.williamson@xxxxxx>, xen-ia64-devel <xen-ia64-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Delivery-date:	Mon, 19 Nov 2007 10:12:12 -0800
Dkim-signature:	v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:references; bh=OzdN4Ys/xAvwgZRJsIL7zF5cZERP0wylpXViRLJNrjE=; b=i1UYFeK8/bRRQUaYIo1qcjpiBFehXl1MqLI+/dckxDnOPfuU14gQj1iK4DmSDKp7IzxoyYn7SSGPC5loJhREaNOiB1iiq6/j3xuLUJpanyYwpLThXqBw6x29LXAD9SxCdILnJN93rflxnQcC+ns+5jfA6A9fJsOy8TUueeEGnpI=
Domainkey-signature:	a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:references; b=bhZ8O53N8jhQEYBJuhoe3gTYyx4sdCHdDmDktaI/gM32PrzIU7UQ0vy3RuWKSVv/HZzg7ExIHvl+RUXDfFPndAZxwX0A0Rw3rDr1NalTEHKWw+tMZnkZ8/setE13VdFBYDRoHYelljhRWsuYjN3uk3g19E3PGL9pLhVDY2Oh4qA=
Envelope-to:	www-data@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to:	<C34D142E.17A7B%Keir.Fraser@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
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:	<1193762458.31834.24.camel@bling> <C34D142E.17A7B%Keir.Fraser@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sender:	xen-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Alex is correct; there is a bug with size=32 operations. The fix is simple. We'll submit an updated patch very soon.
-- rsp

On 10/30/07, Keir Fraser <Keir.Fraser@xxxxxxxxxxxx > wrote:

On 30/10/07 16:40, "Alex Williamson" <alex.williamson@xxxxxx> wrote:

> On Tue, 2007-10-30 at 16:24 +0000, Keir Fraser wrote:
>> Yeah, hopefully that's a bug in the comment. I would expect 4-byte accesses
>> to be possible and be handled. As for 8-byte accesses, they can certainly
>> happen, why not? Unlikely at start of day, but once we're in x86/64 mode
>> there's no reason why not.
>
>    Right, and it seems that the "quadword" handling is quite specific to
> timeoffset.  It takes advantage of the fact that that there's no address
> and stuff some of the data in there.  So, I think both 4 & 8 byte
> buffered mmio is likely broken right now on x86.  Thanks,

I guess we'll see how testing goes over the next little while. If the
bufioreq changes prove to be broken we can back them out before 3.2.0 , or
better yet fix them ;-).

-- Keir

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

WARNING - OLD ARCHIVES

xen-devel

Re: [PATCH] Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] Std VGA Performance