|
xen-devel
Re: [Xen-devel] Re: [PATCH RFC] x86/acpi: don't ignore I/O APICs justbe
|
To: |
"Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@xxxxxxxxxxxx> |
|
Subject: |
Re: [Xen-devel] Re: [PATCH RFC] x86/acpi: don't ignore I/O APICs justbecause there's no local APIC |
|
From: |
Yinghai Lu <yhlu.kernel@xxxxxxxxx> |
|
Date: |
Fri, 19 Jun 2009 20:58:24 -0700 |
|
Cc: |
Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@xxxxxxxx>, Xen-devel <xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, the arch/x86 maintainers <x86@xxxxxxxxxx>, Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Jan Beulich <JBeulich@xxxxxxxxxx>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@xxxxxxxxxx>, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@xxxxxxxxx>, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Len Brown <lenb@xxxxxxxxxx> |
|
Delivery-date: |
Fri, 19 Jun 2009 20:58:55 -0700 |
|
Dkim-signature: |
v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:in-reply-to:references :date:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=4M9HTVuNJ7ndVpxtPliFuIS4CLSLR/zrSvCvuSZGbYI=; b=jLrBZbCyTUYYydZZeYGmVfSkjQuK+cvZL2Id6hBl+Qnh44Uo5PzXyVV400buwqPCls B10/3nGVw/THt4XH7B+pKLeoTMCfwFTUS5wXnak2Y90pHKyZF7wJNEeTq8rUXFiJTUEX QKNoZzIR9Kyn2q0Fwr3VgwwxoMO3bsNzPlxKg= |
|
Domainkey-signature: |
a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=RcGtE3L8BQG8+rU/t/wlF122vuYTBBlA+5g4KVoodmQp4/ibv5yU+h576Si6Cz6UDe ZdIBi5JqhjQtJL+1PXLv2WynzH6SvP9Ir7kNWd0CvNSKOWcGO8K7T37Wz/u874horn7X nIBctGUrFVQN5ajdgfun8O+xH+zPYGG5Rfc6M= |
|
Envelope-to: |
www-data@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx |
|
In-reply-to: |
<m1my84bpuq.fsf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
|
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: |
<4A329CF8.4050502@xxxxxxxx> <alpine.LFD.2.00.0906181206190.4213@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <4A3A9220.4070807@xxxxxxxx> <m1zlc5jqac.fsf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <4A3A99FB.7070807@xxxxxxxx> <m1vdmtgtt2.fsf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <4A3AC0C4.6060508@xxxxxxxx> <86802c440906182232r31088e4fh3613a8da6f8903f7@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <4A3B5FCD0200007800006AC0@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <m1my84bpuq.fsf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
|
Sender: |
xen-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx |
On Fri, Jun 19, 2009 at 1:16 AM, Eric W. Biederman<ebiederm@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> "Jan Beulich" <JBeulich@xxxxxxxxxx> writes:
>
>>>>> Yinghai Lu <yhlu.kernel@xxxxxxxxx> 19.06.09 07:32 >>>
>>>doesn't XEN support per cpu irq vector?
>>
>> No.
>>
>>>got sth from XEN 3.3 / SLES 11
>>>
>>>igb 0000:81:00.0: PCI INT A -> GSI 95 (level, low) -> IRQ 95
>>>igb 0000:81:00.0: setting latency timer to 64
>>>igb 0000:81:00.0: Intel(R) Gigabit Ethernet Network Connection
>>>igb 0000:81:00.0: eth9: (PCIe:2.5Gb/s:Width x4) 00:21:28:3a:d8:0e
>>>igb 0000:81:00.0: eth9: PBA No: ffffff-0ff
>>>igb 0000:81:00.0: Using MSI-X interrupts. 4 rx queue(s), 4 tx queue(s)
>>>vendor=8086 device=3420
>>>(XEN) irq.c:847: dom0: invalid pirq 94 or vector -28
>>>igb 0000:81:00.1: PCI INT B -> GSI 94 (level, low) -> IRQ 94
>>>igb 0000:81:00.1: setting latency timer to 64
>>>(XEN) physdev.c:87: dom0: map irq with wrong vector -28
>>>map irq failed
>>>(XEN) physdev.c:87: dom0: map irq with wrong vector -28
>>>map irq failed
>>>
>>>the system need a lot of MSI-X normally.. with current mainline tree
>>>kernel, it will need about 360 irq...
>>
>> Do you mean 360 connected devices, or just 360 IO-APIC pins (most of
>> which are usually unused)? In the latter case, devices using MSI (i.e. not
>> using high numbered IO-APIC pins) should work, while devices connected
>> to IO-APIC pins numbered 256 and higher won't work in SLE11 as-is.
>> This limitation got fixed recently in the 3.5-unstable tree, though. The
>> 256 active vectors limit, however, continues to exist, so the former case
>> would still not be supported by Xen.
5 io-apic controllers, so total pins like 5x24
>
> Good question. I know YH had a system a few years ago that exceeded 256
> vectors.
that was in SimNow.
This time is real.
think about system: 24 pcie cards and every one has two functions. and
one function will use 16 or 20 MSIX
like 24 * 2 * 16
YH
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
|
|
|
Home