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] [PATCH] x86: change IO-APIC ack method default forsingle

To: "Keir Fraser" <keir.fraser@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] x86: change IO-APIC ack method default forsingle IO-APIC systems
From: "Jan Beulich" <jbeulich@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 21 Jan 2009 14:44:54 +0000
Cc: Yunhong Jiang <yunhong.jiang@xxxxxxxxx>, "xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx" <xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Delivery-date: Wed, 21 Jan 2009 06:44:52 -0800
Envelope-to: www-data@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <C59CE399.1AB7%keir.fraser@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
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: <E2263E4A5B2284449EEBD0AAB751098401C609FB38@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <C59CE399.1AB7%keir.fraser@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sender: xen-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>> Keir Fraser <keir.fraser@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> 21.01.09 15:37 >>>
>On 21/01/2009 14:23, "Jiang, Yunhong" <yunhong.jiang@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>> xen-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx <> wrote:
>>> Ever since 3.0.2 we've been carrying this patch in our products. Since
>>> there was no indication that there would be anything wrong with the
>>> 'new' IO-APIC ack method added back then, we finally decided to drop
>>> this patch recently from SLE11, to find that the subsequent release
>>> candidate failed to work on at least on system without using
>> 
>> This is a bit strange, a bit curios that do you know the reason that it not
>> working? 
>
>Yes - this also -- there doesn't seem to be a good reason that the 'new'
>ack_type wouldn't work in all cases. We're also somewhat depending on it (or
>similar) for unmaskable MSIs.

Right - but MSIs were the only interrupts staying alive on that system with
the 'new' method.

Jan


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