[Xen-devel] Re: Interrupt to CPU routing in HVM domains - again

[Keir Fraser <keir.fraser@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On 5/9/08 11:13, "James Harper" <james.harper@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

>> The only thing I can think of (and should certainly be checked!) is that
>> some of your event channels are erroneously getting bound to vcpu != 0.
>> Are
>> you running an irq load balancer or somesuch? Obviously event channels
>> bound
>> to vcpu != 0 will now never be serviced, whereas before your changes you
>> would probabilistically 'get lucky'.
> 
> In allocating event channels, I'm doing EVTCHNOP_alloc_unbound and then
> passing the returned event channel number to Dom0 via xenbus. Is there
> anything else I need to do? Do I need a specific hypercall to bind the
> event channel to cpu 0 only? I'll check the 'unmodified drivers'
> source...

Nope, default is binding to vcpu0, except for some VIRQs and IPIs. This even
gets reset for you across a particular port being freed and re-allocated.

> The thing is, my performance testing has shown good results for SMP
> (vcpus=4) and UP, but Bart has reported that he only gets good
> performance when he checks the vcpu_info for the cpu that the interrupt
> has been triggered on.

Well, that doesn't make much sense. He should still check port bindings (a
program 'lsevtchn' shoudl get installed in dom0 for this purpose -- source
is tools/xcutils/lsevtchn.c) just in case. I think lsevtchn will need
extending to print the bound vcpu (it does get returned by the hypercall).
I'll check in a patch to xen-unstable for that, but it's easy to lash up
yourself.

 -- Keir



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