On Tue, Sep 28, 2010 at 12:35:12PM -0600, Lin, Ray wrote:
>
> > (XEN) [VT-D]iommu.c:824: iommu_fault_status: Primary Pending Fault
> > (XEN) [VT-D]iommu.c:799: DMAR:[DMA Write] Request device [07:00.0]
> > fault addr c00000, iommu reg = ffff82c3fff57000
>
> The driver gets the physical addr 0xc0049c thru kernel function
> virt_to_phys() and set the dma address of Tachyon chip with this address.
> This address translation is also involved with SWIOTLB library. Is there any
> issue related with SWIOTLB in pvops kernel ?
If the driver is using pci_map_page, which goes through the Xen-SWIOTLB
library, then
it works correctly (the Xen-SWIOTLB does a PFN->MFN translation to give you the
bus address).
I presume the physical address (0xc0049c) is the BAR of the PCI device, right?
There are no issues with the Xen-SWIOTLB in the pvops kernel.
>
>
>
>
> -Ray
>
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk [mailto:konrad.wilk@xxxxxxxxxx]
> Sent: Tuesday, September 28, 2010 9:19 AM
> To: Lin, Ray; JBeulich@xxxxxxxxxx
> Cc: Bruce Edge; Jiang, Yunhong; xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] pv-ops domU not working with MSI interrupts on
> Nehalem
>
> On Tue, Sep 28, 2010 at 10:08:57AM -0600, Lin, Ray wrote:
> > I just checked the "xen dmesg". Look like DMA/iommu is the root cause
> > of this issue. In order to tell the source of interrupt, Tachyon chip needs
> > to do the DMA write to a dword memory location to indicate the source of
> > interrupt. What iommu option do you recommend to use ?
>
> Lets get Jan involved in this discussion.
>
> Jan, would some of your patches that inhibit the MSI write affect this in a
> PV guest?
>
> >
> > (XEN) [VT-D]iommu.c:824: iommu_fault_status: Primary Pending Fault
> > (XEN) [VT-D]iommu.c:799: DMAR:[DMA Write] Request device [07:00.0]
> > fault addr c00000, iommu reg = ffff82c3fff57000
> > (XEN) DMAR:[fault reason 05h] PTE Write access is not set
> > (XEN) print_vtd_entries: iommu = ffff83019fffa370 bdf = 7:0.0 gmfn = c00
> > (XEN) root_entry = ffff83019ff70000
> > (XEN) root_entry[7] = 19cf52001
> > (XEN) context = ffff83019cf52000
> > (XEN) context[0] = 102_706dc005
> > (XEN) l4 = ffff8300706dc000
> > (XEN) l4_index = 0
> > (XEN) l4[0] = 706db003
> > (XEN) l3 = ffff8300706db000
> > (XEN) l3_index = 0
> > (XEN) l3[0] = 706da003
> > (XEN) l2 = ffff8300706da000
> > (XEN) l2_index = 6
> > (XEN) l2[6] = 0
> >
> >
> > -Ray
> >
> >
> > ________________________________
> > From: xen-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > [mailto:xen-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Bruce Edge
> > Sent: Monday, September 27, 2010 9:46 PM
> > To: Jiang, Yunhong
> > Cc: xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk
> > Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] pv-ops domU not working with MSI interrupts
> > on Nehalem
> >
> > On Mon, Sep 27, 2010 at 8:26 PM, Jiang, Yunhong
> > <yunhong.jiang@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:yunhong.jiang@xxxxxxxxx>> wrote:
> > "xm dmesg" should gives xen's boot log, and sometimes it contain some
> > helpful information, I think, especially loglvl and guest_loglvl is set to
> > all.
> >
> > I looked at the xm dmesg output and there's nothing more than what I
> > already provided, aside from a bunch of commands from me poking at it.
> >
> > -Bruce
> >
> >
> > Thanks
> > --jyh
> >
> > From: Bruce Edge
> > [mailto:bruce.edge@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:bruce.edge@xxxxxxxxx>]
> > Sent: Tuesday, September 28, 2010 11:16 AM
> > To: Jiang, Yunhong
> > Cc: Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk;
> > xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> >
> > Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] pv-ops domU not working with MSI interrupts
> > on Nehalem
> >
> > On Mon, Sep 27, 2010 at 6:15 PM, Jiang, Yunhong
> > <yunhong.jiang@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:yunhong.jiang@xxxxxxxxx>> wrote:
> > Is the 07:0.0 your tachyon device? The VT-d fault is suspcious.
> >
> > Yes, there is 1 quad port card is this sytem:
> >
> > 07:00.0 Fibre Channel: PMC-Sierra Inc. Device 8032 (rev 08)
> > 07:00.1 Fibre Channel: PMC-Sierra Inc. Device 8032 (rev 08)
> > 07:00.2 Fibre Channel: PMC-Sierra Inc. Device 8032 (rev 08)
> > 07:00.3 Fibre Channel: PMC-Sierra Inc. Device 8032 (rev 08)
> >
> >
> > Also is it possible to share the xen output?
> >
> > I attached the dom0 boot output. Let me know if you wanted something else.
> >
> > Also, here's the dom0 console output upon starting the VM: This lockdep
> > error started with the release of 2.6.32.21. Note that I'm running the same
> > kernel for the domU and dom0.
> >
> > [ 1817.684097] ------------[ cut here ]------------ [ 1817.684113]
> > WARNING: at kernel/lockdep.c:2323
> > trace_hardirqs_on_caller+0x12f/0x190()
> > [ 1817.684119] Hardware name: ProLiant DL380 G6 [ 1817.684122] Modules
> > linked in: xt_physdev ipv6 osa_mfgdom0 xenfs xen_gntdev fbcon tileblit
> > font bitblit softcursor xen_evtchn xen_pciback radeon ttm
> > drm_kms_helper tun drm i2c_algo_bit ipmi_si i2c_core ipmi_msghandler joydev
> > serio_raw hpwdt hpilo bridge stp llc usbhid hid cciss usb_storage [
> > 1817.684190] Pid: 11, comm: xenwatch Not tainted 2.6.32.21-xenoprof-1 #1 [
> > 1817.684195] Call Trace:
> > [ 1817.684197] <IRQ> [<ffffffff810aa18f>] ?
> > trace_hardirqs_on_caller+0x12f/0x190
> > [ 1817.684209] [<ffffffff8106bed0>] warn_slowpath_common+0x80/0xd0 [
> > 1817.684217] [<ffffffff815f2b80>] ? _spin_unlock_irq+0x30/0x40 [
> > 1817.684223] [<ffffffff8106bf34>] warn_slowpath_null+0x14/0x20 [
> > 1817.684229] [<ffffffff810aa18f>]
> > trace_hardirqs_on_caller+0x12f/0x190
> > [ 1817.684234] [<ffffffff810aa1fd>] trace_hardirqs_on+0xd/0x10 [
> > 1817.684240] [<ffffffff815f2b80>] _spin_unlock_irq+0x30/0x40 [
> > 1817.684266] [<ffffffff813c4fc5>]
> > add_to_net_schedule_list_tail+0x85/0xd0
> > [ 1817.684271] [<ffffffff813c6216>] netif_be_int+0x36/0x160 [
> > 1817.684278] [<ffffffff810e10d0>] handle_IRQ_event+0x70/0x180 [
> > 1817.684284] [<ffffffff810e36e9>] handle_edge_irq+0xc9/0x170 [
> > 1817.684291] [<ffffffff813b8d7f>] __xen_evtchn_do_upcall+0x1bf/0x1f0
> > [ 1817.684297] [<ffffffff813b92fd>] xen_evtchn_do_upcall+0x3d/0x60 [
> > 1817.684304] [<ffffffff8101647e>]
> > xen_do_hypervisor_callback+0x1e/0x30
> > [ 1817.684308] <EOI> [<ffffffff8100940a>] ?
> > hypercall_page+0x40a/0x1010 [ 1817.684319] [<ffffffff8100940a>] ?
> > hypercall_page+0x40a/0x1010 [ 1817.684325] [<ffffffff813bce54>] ?
> > xb_write+0x1e4/0x290 [ 1817.684330] [<ffffffff813bd8ca>] ?
> > xs_talkv+0x6a/0x1f0 [ 1817.684336] [<ffffffff813bd8d8>] ?
> > xs_talkv+0x78/0x1f0 [ 1817.684341] [<ffffffff813bdbcd>] ?
> > xs_single+0x4d/0x60 [ 1817.684346] [<ffffffff813be502>] ?
> > xenbus_read+0x52/0x80 [ 1817.684352] [<ffffffff813c87fc>] ?
> > frontend_changed+0x48c/0x770 [ 1817.684358] [<ffffffff813bf76d>] ?
> > xenbus_otherend_changed+0xdd/0x1b0
> > [ 1817.684365] [<ffffffff8101122f>] ?
> > xen_restore_fl_direct_end+0x0/0x1 [ 1817.684371] [<ffffffff810ac830>]
> > ? lock_release+0xb0/0x230 [ 1817.684376] [<ffffffff813bfae0>] ?
> > frontend_changed+0x10/0x20 [ 1817.684382] [<ffffffff813bd4f5>] ?
> > xenwatch_thread+0x55/0x160 [ 1817.684389] [<ffffffff81093400>] ?
> > autoremove_wake_function+0x0/0x40 [ 1817.684394] [<ffffffff813bd4a0>]
> > ? xenwatch_thread+0x0/0x160 [ 1817.684400] [<ffffffff81093086>] ?
> > kthread+0x96/0xb0 [ 1817.684405] [<ffffffff8101632a>] ?
> > child_rip+0xa/0x20 [ 1817.684410] [<ffffffff81015c90>] ?
> > restore_args+0x0/0x30 [ 1817.684415] [<ffffffff81016320>] ?
> > child_rip+0x0/0x20
> >
> > -Bruce
> >
> >
> >
> > Thanks
> > --jyh
> >
> > >-----Original Message-----
> > >From:
> > >xen-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:xen-devel-bounces@lists.
> > >xensource.com>
> > >[mailto:xen-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:xen-devel-bounce
> > >s@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>] On Behalf Of Bruce Edge
> > >Sent: Tuesday, September 28, 2010 7:54 AM
> > >To: Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk
> > >Cc:
> > >xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > >Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] pv-ops domU not working with MSI interrupts
> > >on Nehalem
> > >
> > >On Mon, Sep 27, 2010 at 12:54 PM, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk
> > ><konrad.wilk@xxxxxxxxxx<mailto:konrad.wilk@xxxxxxxxxx>> wrote:
> > >> On Mon, Sep 27, 2010 at 12:16:50PM -0700, Bruce Edge wrote:
> > >>> On Mon, Sep 27, 2010 at 10:24 AM, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk
> > >>> <konrad.wilk@xxxxxxxxxx<mailto:konrad.wilk@xxxxxxxxxx>> wrote:
> > >>> >
> > >>> > On Mon, Sep 27, 2010 at 08:52:39AM -0700, Bruce Edge wrote:
> > >>> > > One of our developers who is working on a tachyon driver is
> > >>> > > complaining that the pvops domU kernel is not working for
> > >>> > > these MSI interrupts.
> > >>> > > This is using the current head of xen/2.6.32.x on both a
> > >>> > > single Nahelam 920 and a dual E5540. This behavior is
> > >>> > > consistent with Xen 4.0.1, 4.0.2.rc1-pre and 4.1.
> > >>> > >
> > >>> > > Here are his comments:
> > >>> > >
> > >>> > > - the driver has no problem to enable msi interrupt and
> > >>> > > request the interrupt through kernel functions pci_enable_msi
> > >>> > > & request_irq
> > >>> >
> > >>> > What shows up in the Xen console when you send the 'q' key? Does
> > >>> > it show that the vector is assigned to the appropiate guest?
> > >>>
> > >>> The Xen console q key shows that the domU is assigned:
> > >>>
> > >>> (XEN) Interrupts { 32, 41-42, 47 }
> > >>
> > >> Aha!
> > >>
> > >>>
> > >>> but the domU thinks it has:
> > >>>
> > >>> 124/125/126/127
> > >>>
> > >>> Is there some mapping that's taking place, or is this plain wrong?
> > >>
> > >> That looks wrong. The IRQ numbers (even though they are MSI
> > >> vectors) are setup as IRQ numbers in the DomU guest. You should
> > >> have seen
> > >>
> > >> 32:
> > >> 41:
> > >> 42:
> > >> 47:
> > >> in you /proc/interrupts on your DomU guest.
> > >>
> > >> I wonder what broke - can you use
> > >git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/konrad/xen.git<http://g
> > >it.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/konrad/xen.git>
> > >> devel/xen-pcifront-0.5 (or pv/pcifront-2.6.32)?
> > >
> > >Please forgive the git ignorance.
> > >
> > >Is this the right syntax?
> > >
> > >git clone
> > >git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/konrad:pv/pcifront-2.6.
> > >32<http://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/konrad:pv/pcifront-
> > >2.6.32>
> > >linux-2.6.32-pv-pcifront
> > >
> > >Initialized empty Git repository in
> > >/import/kaan/bedge/src/xen/kernel/pv-ops/linux-2.6.32-pv-pcifront/.gi
> > >t/
> > >fatal: The remote end hung up unexpectedly
> > >
> > >Or:
> > >
> > > git clone
> > > git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/konrad/xen.git<http://
> > > git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/konrad/xen.git>
> > >
> > >Initialized empty Git repository in
> > >/import/kaan/bedge/src/xen/kernel/pv-ops/xen/.git/
> > >remote: error: Could not read
> > >59eab2f8f04147c5aadc99f2034ca7e5b81e890f
> > >remote: fatal: Failed to traverse parents of commit
> > >979e121cb348add17ed8171bf447b27a3a9d1be3
> > >remote: aborting due to possible repository corruption on the remote side.
> > >fatal: early EOF
> > >fatal: index-pack failed
> > >
> > >>
> > >> It has the latest pcifront driver but without the PVonHVM
> > >> enhancments so we can try to eliminate the PvONHVM logic out of the
> > >> picture.
> > >>
> > >>>
> > >>> >
> > >>> > > - the interrupt does happen. But the interrupt service routine
> > >>> > > of tachyon driver doesn't detect any interrupt status related
> > >>> > > to this interrupt, which inhibits the tachyon chip from coming
> > >>> > > on-line. And there are high count of tachyon interrupt in
> > >>> > > /proc/interrupts
> > >>> >
> > >>> > Is it checking the PCI_STATUS_INTERRUPT or the appropiate
> > >>> > register in the MMIO BAR?
> > >>> >
> > >>>
> > >>> The driver would check the appropriate register (tachyon
> > >>> registers) in the MMIO to determine the source of interrupts.
> > >>
> > >> OK, so that isn't it. Is there anything at these vectors:
> > >> 7c, 7d, 7e, and 7f? When you use xen debug-keys 'i' or 'q' it
> > >> should give you an inkling what device this is set for.
> > >
> > >When I run a distro kernel in hvm mode, I get the expected irq mappings:
> > >
> > >'i' - Note 66 - 69
> > >(XEN) IRQ: 66 affinity:ffffffff,ffffffff,ffffffff,ffffffff vec:3a
> > >type=PCI-MSI status=00000010 in-flight=0
> > >domain-list=10:127(----),
> > >(XEN) IRQ: 67 affinity:ffffffff,ffffffff,ffffffff,ffffffff vec:42
> > >type=PCI-MSI status=00000010 in-flight=0
> > >domain-list=10:126(----),
> > >(XEN) IRQ: 68 affinity:ffffffff,ffffffff,ffffffff,ffffffff vec:4a
> > >type=PCI-MSI status=00000010 in-flight=0
> > >domain-list=10:125(----),
> > >(XEN) IRQ: 69 affinity:ffffffff,ffffffff,ffffffff,ffffffff vec:52
> > >type=PCI-MSI status=00000010 in-flight=0
> > >domain-list=10:124(----)
> > >
> > >
> > >'q'
> > >(XEN) Interrupts { 32, 41-42, 47, 124-127 }
> > >
> > >
> > >The same data with pv-ops kernel shows:
> > >
> > >'i'
> > >IRQ numbers stop at 65, no 66 - 69 present:
> > >
> > >(XEN) IRQ: 63 affinity:ffffffff,ffffffff,ffffffff,ffffffff vec:91
> > >type=PCI-MSI status=00000010 in-flight=0
> > >domain-list=0:289(----),
> > >(XEN) IRQ: 64 affinity:ffffffff,ffffffff,ffffffff,ffffffff vec:99
> > >type=PCI-MSI status=00000002 mapped, unbound
> > >(XEN) IRQ: 65 affinity:ffffffff,ffffffff,ffffffff,ffffffff vec:b1
> > >type=PCI-MSI status=00000010 in-flight=0
> > >domain-list=0:287(----),
> > >(XEN) IO-APIC interrupt information:
> > >
> > >'q'
> > >(XEN) Interrupts { 32, 41-42, 47 }
> > >
> > >>
> > >>>
> > >>> > >
> > >>> > > kaan-18-dpm:~# cat /proc/interrupts | grep TACH
> > >>> > >
> > >124: 760415 0 0 0 0
> > > 0
> > >>> > > 0 0 0 0 0
> > > 0
> > >>> > > 0 0 xen-pirq-pcifront-msi HW_TACHYON
> > >>> > >
> > >125: 762234 0 0 0 0
> > > 0
> > >>> > > 0 0 0 0 0
> > > 0
> > >>> > > 0 0 xen-pirq-pcifront-msi HW_TACHYON
> > >>> > >
> > >126: 764180 0 0 0 0
> > > 0
> > >>> > > 0 0 0 0 0
> > > 0
> > >>> > > 0 0 xen-pirq-pcifront-msi HW_TACHYON
> > >>> > >
> > >127: 764164 0 0 0 0
> > > 0
> > >>> > > 0 0 0 0 0
> > > 0
> > >>> > > 0 0 xen-pirq-pcifront-msi HW_TACHYON
> > >>> >
> > >>> > Can you provide the full dmesg output?
> > >>>
> > >>> Attached.
> > >>>
> > >>> Some possibly related messages on dom0 console:
> > >>>
> > >>> [ 1882.269778] pciback 0000:07:00.0: enabling device (0000 ->
> > >>> 0003) [ 1882.269800] xen: registering gsi 32 triggering 0 polarity
> > >>> 1 [ 1882.269827] xen_allocate_pirq: returning irq 32 for gsi 32 [
> > >>> 1882.269834] xen: --> irq=32 [ 1882.269841] Already setup the GSI
> > >>> :32 [ 1882.269847] pciback 0000:07:00.0: PCI INT A -> GSI 32
> > >>> (level, low) -> IRQ 32 [ 1882.269866] pciback 0000:07:00.0:
> > >>> setting latency timer to 64 [ 1882.270463] pciback 0000:07:00.0:
> > >>> Driver tried to write to a read-only configuration space field at
> > >>> offset 0x62, size 2. This may be harmless, but if you have
> > >>> problems with your device:
> > >>
> > >> Uhhh, for that I think you need to do 'lspci -vvv -xxx -s 07:00.00'
> > >> to find out what is at the configuration space. You could enable it
> > >> using the permissive attribute.
> > >>
> > >>> [ 1882.270465] 1) see permissive attribute in sysfs [ 1882.270467]
> > >>> 2) report problems to the xen-devel mailing list along with
> > >>> details of your device obtained from lspci.
> > >>> [ 1882.270615] alloc irq_desc for 478 on node 0
> > >>> [ 1882.270625] alloc kstat_irqs on node 0
> > >>
> > >> So for 478: what do you see? xen-pciback I presume?
> > >>> [ 1882.348411] pciback 0000:07:00.1: enabling device (0000 ->
> > >>> 0003) [ 1882.348433] xen: registering gsi 42 triggering 0 polarity
> > >>> 1 [ 1882.348440] xen_allocate_pirq: returning irq 42 for gsi 42 [
> > >>> 1882.348445] xen: --> irq=42 [ 1882.348472] Already setup the GSI
> > >>> :42 [ 1882.348479] pciback 0000:07:00.1: PCI INT B -> GSI 42
> > >>> (level, low) -> IRQ 42 [ 1882.348497] pciback 0000:07:00.1:
> > >>> setting latency timer to 64 [ 1882.349063] pciback 0000:07:00.1:
> > >>> Driver tried to write to a read-only configuration space field at
> > >>> offset 0x62, size 2. This may be harmless, but if you have
> > >>> problems with your device:
> > >>> [ 1882.349066] 1) see permissive attribute in sysfs [ 1882.349067]
> > >>> 2) report problems to the xen-devel mailing list along with
> > >>> details of your device obtained from lspci.
> > >>> [ 1882.349205] alloc irq_desc for 477 on node 0
> > >>> [ 1882.349215] alloc kstat_irqs on node 0
> > >>> [ 1882.402893] pciback 0000:07:00.2: enabling device (0000 ->
> > >>> 0003) [ 1882.402908] xen: registering gsi 47 triggering 0 polarity
> > >>> 1 [ 1882.402913] xen_allocate_pirq: returning irq 47 for gsi 47 [
> > >>> 1882.402916] xen: --> irq=47 [ 1882.402921] Already setup the GSI
> > >>> :47 [ 1882.402925] pciback 0000:07:00.2: PCI INT C -> GSI 47
> > >>> (level, low) -> IRQ 47 [ 1882.402938] pciback 0000:07:00.2:
> > >>> setting latency timer to 64 [ 1882.403280] pciback 0000:07:00.2:
> > >>> Driver tried to write to a read-only configuration space field at
> > >>> offset 0x62, size 2. This may be harmless, but if you have
> > >>> problems with your device:
> > >>> [ 1882.403282] 1) see permissive attribute in sysfs [ 1882.403282]
> > >>> 2) report problems to the xen-devel mailing list along with
> > >>> details of your device obtained from lspci.
> > >>> [ 1882.403380] alloc irq_desc for 476 on node 0
> > >>> [ 1882.403386] alloc kstat_irqs on node 0
> > >>> (XEN) [VT-D]iommu.c:824: iommu_fault_status: Primary Pending Fault
> > >>> (XEN) [VT-D]iommu.c:799: DMAR:[DMA Write] Request device [07:00.0]
> > >>> fault addr e6f80000, iommu reg = ffff82c3fff57000
> > >>> (XEN) DMAR:[fault reason 05h] PTE Write access is not set
> > >>> (XEN) print_vtd_entries: iommu = ffff83019fffa370 bdf = 7:0.0 gmfn =
> > >>> e6f80
> > >>> (XEN) root_entry = ffff83019ff70000
> > >>> (XEN) root_entry[7] = 19cf52001
> > >>> (XEN) context = ffff83019cf52000
> > >>> (XEN) context[0] = 102_706dc005
> > >>> (XEN) l4 = ffff8300706dc000
> > >>> (XEN) l4_index = 0
> > >>> (XEN) l4[0] = 706db003
> > >>> (XEN) l3 = ffff8300706db000
> > >>> (XEN) l3_index = 3
> > >>> (XEN) l3[3] = 702b6003
> > >>> (XEN) l2 = ffff8300702b6000
> > >>> (XEN) l2_index = 137
> > >>> (XEN) l2[137] = 0
> > >>> (XEN) l2[137] not present
> > >>> (XEN) traps.c:466:d0 Unhandled nmi fault/trap [#2] on VCPU 0
> > >>> [ec=0000]
> > >>
> > >> That is not good. What changed from your earlier emails that this was
> > >> triggered?
> > >
> > >Nothing
> > >> Or was it triggered all along?
> > >
> > >Yes, I just included it for completeness
> > >
> > >> What happens if you run the system without the iommu enabled?
> > >
> > >Haven't tried yet. Will check that next.
> > >
> > >-Bruce
> > >
> > >_______________________________________________
> > >Xen-devel mailing list
> > >Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > >http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
> >
> >
> _______________________________________________
> 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
|
Home