Re: [Xen-devel] PCI Passthru: fn0 exported but not fn1

[Jambunathan K <jambunathan@xxxxxxxxxx>]

Jambunathan K wrote:
> Keir Fraser wrote:
>> Why did you not use VPCI? Does that not work for you? It should avoid the
>> problem that is currently blocking your progress.
>>
>>  -- Keir
>>
>>
>> On 24/8/07 15:58, "Jambunathan K" <jambunathan@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>
>>> CONFIG_XEN_PCIDEV_FRONTEND=y
>>> CONFIG_XEN_PCIDEV_FE_DEBUG=y
>>> CONFIG_XEN_PCIDEV_BACKEND=y
>>> # CONFIG_XEN_PCIDEV_BACKEND_VPCI is not set
>>> CONFIG_XEN_PCIDEV_BACKEND_PASS=y
>>> # CONFIG_XEN_PCIDEV_BACKEND_SLOT is not set
>>> CONFIG_XEN_PCIDEV_BE_DEBUG=y
>>>
>>> I have overridden default VPCI with explicit BACKEND_PASS. Both Dom0 and
>>> Dom1 run the same kernel binary.
>>>
>>> I had used the above configuration all along (on both Xen304 + Xen310)
>>> and have seen fn1 exported 'as such' to Dom1. It is with my new box that
>>> I have the above issue.
>>
>>
> 
> I did some more experiments and here is what I find.
> 
> I) In PASS mode,
>       a) Guest domain *cannot* see fn2 if *only* fn2 is exported.
>       b) Guest domain *can* see fn2 *only if* fn0 is also exported to it.
> 
> II) In VPCI mode,
>       a) Guest domain *cannot* see fn2 if *only* fn2 is exported.
>       b) Guest domain *can* see fn2 *only if* fn0 is also exported to it.
> 
> III) In SLOT mode,
>       a) Guest doamin can see fn2 even if *only* fn2 is exported.
> 
> 
> A cursory look suggests that the difference in behaviour is due to the
> way pcifront scans devices. It scans non-zero fns only if it actually
> sees a device at *fn0*.
> 
> Our device requires that the fn-no be preserved as such (even if other
> PCI params change) for proper working.
> 
> I am trying to export 4 PCI functions in our device to 4 different
> domains. I am stuck at not being able to use *any* of the passthrough
> methods.
> 
> If behaviours (I) and (II) above is as intended may I know why this is
> so?. If not, would you agree that this is a bug?
> 


I confirming that this is a regression from xen304 to xen310. (I
verified just the 'BACKEND_PASS' config)

I had cursorily looked at pciback and pcifront code changes between
xen304 to xen310. My not so discerning eye couldn't catch any
differences that do matter.

For now I have reverted my working tree to Xen-304. I would appreciate
if you could provide a patch that addresses this issue in Xen310.

Jambunathan K.


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