| |
|
 |
|
 |
|
|
|
| |
|
|
xen-ia64-devel
Re: [Xen-ia64-devel][PATCH] Optimize hypercall path in VTI domain
Hi Anthony-san,
I've checked it latest changeset (cs:13837). VNIF is available
with the patch.
I'll submit the patch and following patch.
Thanks,
- Tsunehisa Doi
I (Doi.Tsunehisa) said:
> Hi Anthony-san,
>
> Thank you for your information.
>
> We'll try with latest changeset (cs:13837).
>
> You (anthony.xu) said:
> > Hi Doi-san,
> >
> > I think you should try Cs13774 or latest Cset,
> > The patch of "Optimize hypercall path in VTI domain" was checked in at
Cs
> 13774.
> > And this patch is a must for PV-on-HVM.
> >
> > - Anthony
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Tomonari Horikoshi [mailto:t.horikoshi@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
> > Sent: 2007年2月2日 16:35
> > To: Doi.Tsunehisa@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx; Xu, Anthony
> > Cc: xen-ia64-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > Subject: Re: [Xen-ia64-devel][PATCH] Optimize hypercall path in VTI dom
ai
> n
> >
> >
> > Hi Anthony-san
> >
> > Thank you for your patch.
> > I tried to compile of PV-on-HVM in cs13773.
> >
> > But, It made an compile error because there was no "CONFIG_VMX_GUEST".
> >
> > Compile is possible according to the attached patch.
> > But Guest did Hung when "insmod xenbus.ko" was executed.
> >
> >
> > We have not investigated the cause yet.
> > Do you know the problem of looking like this?
> >
> >
> > Thanks,
> > - Tomonari Horikoshi
> >
> > ------------------------------------------------------
> > (XEN) ivt_base: 0xf000000004010000
> > (XEN) arch_boot_vcpu: vcpu 1 awaken 0000000004007f20!
> > (XEN) Warning xen_hypercall should not be called 17
> > (XEN) Warning xen_hypercall should not be called 12
> > (XEN) Warning xen_hypercall should not be called 12
> > (XEN) Warning xen_hypercall should not be called 34
> > (XEN) Warning xen_hypercall should not be called 34
> > (XEN) Warning xen_hypercall should not be called 34
> > (XEN) $$$$$ PANIC in domain 2 (k6=0xf000000007b28000): This memory acce
ss
> instr can't be emulated: 80891325c0 pc=
> > a000000200090b30
> > (XEN) domain_crash_sync called from xenmisc.c:175
> > (XEN) Domain 2 (vcpu#0) crashed on cpu#2:
> > (XEN) d 0xf000000007b1c080 domid 2
> > (XEN) vcpu 0xf000000007b28000 vcpu 0
> > (XEN)
> > (XEN) CPU 2
> > (XEN) psr : 00005210089a6010 ifs : 8000000000000206 ip : [<a0000002000
90
> b31>]
> > (XEN) ip is at ???
> > (XEN) unat: 0000000000000000 pfs : 0000000000000409 rsc : 0000000000000
00
> 3
> > (XEN) rnat: 0000000000000000 bsps: e00000001ed80ed8 pr : 000000000555a
55
> 9
> > (XEN) ldrs: 0000000000f80000 ccv : 0000000000000000 fpsr: 0009804c8a700
33
> f
> > (XEN) csd : 0000000000000000 ssd : 0000000000000000
> > (XEN) b0 : a000000200090d60 b6 : a000000100204680 b7 : a000000100203
86
> 0
> > (XEN) f6 : 000000000000000000000 f7 : 1003e0000000000000007
> > (XEN) f8 : 1003e0000000000000218 f9 : 1003e000000199d10e381
> > (XEN) f10 : 1003e585da8c236353111 f11 : 1003e0000000000000012
> > (XEN) r1 : a000000200290000 r2 : 0000000000000000 r3 : a0000002000a2
88
> 8
> > (XEN) r8 : e00000001ed80dd4 r9 : e00000001ed87df0 r10 : 0000000000000
00
> 1
> > (XEN) r11 : 0000000000000001 r12 : e00000001ed87dd0 r13 : e00000001ed80
00
> 0
> > (XEN) r14 : 0000000000000000 r15 : 0000000000000000 r16 : c0000000c2000
e0
> 0
> > (XEN) r17 : c0000000c2000e00 r18 : fffffffffffffffe r19 : c0000000c2000
00
> 0
> > (XEN) r20 : 0000000000000000 r21 : 0000000000000000 r22 : c0000000c2000
00
> 0
> > (XEN) r23 : ffffffff00000000 r24 : 0000000000000000 r25 : 0000000000000
00
> 0
> > (XEN) r26 : 0000000000000000 r27 : e00000001ed87df4 r28 : 0000000000000
00
> 1
> > (XEN) r29 : a00000020021aaa0 r30 : 0000000000000000 r31 : e00000001c529
83
> 0
> > (XEN)
> > (XEN) Call Trace:
> > (XEN) [<f0000000040b0b20>] show_stack+0x80/0xa0
> > (XEN) sp=f000000007b2fa70 bsp=f00000000
7b
> 29418
> > (XEN) [<f00000000401f920>] __domain_crash+0x110/0x150
> > (XEN) sp=f000000007b2fc40 bsp=f00000000
7b
> 293e8
> > (XEN) [<f00000000401f9a0>] __domain_crash_synchronous+0x40/0xf0
> > (XEN) sp=f000000007b2fc40 bsp=f00000000
7b
> 293c0
> > (XEN) [<f0000000040869d0>] panic_domain+0x140/0x150
> > (XEN) sp=f000000007b2fc40 bsp=f00000000
7b
> 29360
> > (XEN) [<f00000000408d940>] emulate_io_inst+0x1c0/0xba0
> > (XEN) sp=f000000007b2fd70 bsp=f00000000
7b
> 29308
> > (XEN) [<f000000004097d10>] vmx_hpw_miss+0x3c0/0x900
> > (XEN) sp=f000000007b2fde0 bsp=f00000000
7b
> 292a8
> > (XEN) [<f000000004093000>] ia64_leave_hypervisor_prepare+0x0/0x40
> > (XEN) sp=f000000007b2fe00 bsp=f00000000
7b
> 292a8
> > (XEN)
> > (XEN) Call Trace:
> > (XEN) [<f0000000040b0b20>] show_stack+0x80/0xa0
> > (XEN) sp=f000000007b2fa70 bsp=f00000000
7b
> 29418
> > (XEN) [<f00000000401f930>] __domain_crash+0x120/0x150
> > (XEN) sp=f000000007b2fc40 bsp=f00000000
7b
> 293e8
> > (XEN) [<f00000000401f9a0>] __domain_crash_synchronous+0x40/0xf0
> > (XEN) sp=f000000007b2fc40 bsp=f00000000
7b
> 293c0
> > (XEN) [<f0000000040869d0>] panic_domain+0x140/0x150
> > (XEN) sp=f000000007b2fc40 bsp=f00000000
7b
> 29360
> > (XEN) [<f00000000408d940>] emulate_io_inst+0x1c0/0xba0
> > (XEN) sp=f000000007b2fd70 bsp=f00000000
7b
> 29308
> > (XEN) [<f000000004097d10>] vmx_hpw_miss+0x3c0/0x900
> > (XEN) sp=f000000007b2fde0 bsp=f00000000
7b
> 292a8
> > (XEN) [<f000000004093000>] ia64_leave_hypervisor_prepare+0x0/0x40
> > (XEN) sp=f000000007b2fe00 bsp=f00000000
7b
> 292a8
> > (XEN) domain.c:504: arch_domain_create:504 domain 3 pervcpu_vhpt 1
> > (XEN) tlb_track_allocate_entries:69 allocated 256 num_entries 256 num_f
re
> e 256
> > (XEN) tlb_track_create:115 hash 0xf0000001802b8000 hash_size 512
> > (XEN) ### domain f000000007b1c080: rid=80000-c0000 mp_rid=2000
> > (XEN) arch_domain_create: domain=f000000007b1c080
> > (XEN) vpd base: 0xf000000007ba0000, vpd size:65536
> > (XEN) Allocate domain vhpt at 0xf000000043000000
> > (XEN) Allocate domain vtlb at 0xf000000044e00000
> > (XEN) ivt_base: 0xf000000004010000
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Doi.Tsunehisa@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:----------------------
> > Sent: Wed, 31 Jan 2007 19:10:53 +0900
> > Subject: Re: [Xen-ia64-devel][PATCH] Optimize hypercall path in VTI dom
ai
> n
> >
> > > You (anthony.xu) said:
> > > > Hi Doi-san
> > > >
> > > > I know you are working on PV-ON-HVM,
> > > >
> > > > Applying both attatchments can make VBD work on VTI-domain on Cset
13
> 465,
> > > > I didn't try VNIF. In case we are doing the duplicated thing.
> > >
> > > Hi Anthony-san,
> > >
> > > Thank you!! I'll try it.
> > >
> > > BTW, in x86 code, the spec of callback irq was appended. It became
> > > to use PCI INTx line as callback irq. I'll modify to follow it.
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > > - Tsunehisa Doi
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Xen-ia64-devel mailing list
> > > Xen-ia64-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > > http://lists.xensource.com/xen-ia64-devel
> >
>
_______________________________________________
Xen-ia64-devel mailing list
Xen-ia64-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-ia64-devel
|
|
|
| |
|
Home