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] Re: [PATCH 0/5] Add MSI support to xen environment

To: "Keir Fraser" <Keir.Fraser@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: RE: [Xen-devel] Re: [PATCH 0/5] Add MSI support to xen environment
From: "Jiang, Yunhong" <yunhong.jiang@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 7 Nov 2007 10:02:30 +0800
Cc: xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Delivery-date: Tue, 06 Nov 2007 18:04:03 -0800
Envelope-to: www-data@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <C355F933.17F68%Keir.Fraser@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
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/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=subscribe>
List-unsubscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=unsubscribe>
References: <391BF3CDD2DC0848B40ACB72FA97AD590260FC99@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <C355F933.17F68%Keir.Fraser@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sender: xen-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Thread-index: AcgXJpgKtuetZtZRSk2SPUOVajTGGQAieFwCAArETtAAAMMrGwAAXpSgAABdVMgAx7cvwAADBdyGAFbSGUAA/wetDwAfM2zQ
Thread-topic: [Xen-devel] Re: [PATCH 0/5] Add MSI support to xen environment
I update the description of the patch, and add signed-off-by line.
the sequence is :
For xen tree: pirq_per_domain.patch -- msi_irq_xen.patch --
msi_passthrough.patch -- msix-permission.patch
For kernel tree: msi_kernel.patch -- msi_disable.patch
Please review the patches.

Thanks
Yunhong Jiang

Keir Fraser <mailto:Keir.Fraser@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> The patches need a signed-off-by line.
> 
> -- Keir
> 
> On 1/11/07 09:33, "Jiang, Yunhong" <yunhong.jiang@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> 
>> Keir, attached is the updated patchset.
>> 
>> A xen option "msi_irq_enable" is added. the pirq_domain method will
be
>> enabled only when msi_irq_enable=1.
>> 
>> pirq_per_domain.patch is the changes for per domain pirq. When
>> msi_irq_enable=0, it in fact still use old method.
>> msi_irq_xen.patch changes xen for MSI  support. Currently we are
using
>> ACK_NEW method to avoid possible interrupt storm in some device.
>> msi_passthrough.patch add MSI support to VT-d domain.
>> msix-permission.patch is to disable MSI-x MMIO permission for domain
U.
>> 
>> msi_kernel.patch add MSI/MSI-X support to domain0/domainU.
>> msi_disable.patch changes the configuration file. current settting is
to
>> disable MSI by default. 
>> 
>> -- Yunhong Jiang
>> 
>> Keir Fraser <mailto:Keir.Fraser@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>> Er, maybe. Does this slot in with some of the other patches
>>> you previously
>>> sent? Are we shooting to get this into 3.2.0 (scary!)?
>>> 
>>> -- Keir
>>> 
>>> On 30/10/07 14:27, "Jiang, Yunhong" <yunhong.jiang@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>> 
>>>> So, Keir, how about the attached method for the per-domain pirq?
>>>> Now there is no need to change domain0 any more. Also domain U
can't do
>>>> the map. I verified current domain0/domU works on it.
>>>> But it still changes the control panel and hope that is acceptable.
>>>> 
>>>> Thanks
>>>> Yunhong Jiang
>>>> 
>>>> xen-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx <> wrote:
>>>>> On 26/10/07 16:02, "Jiang, Yunhong"
> <yunhong.jiang@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>>>> dom0 needs to be involved, since we can't let domU map any
arbitrary
>>>>>>> vector into its pirq space. Since dom0 has to be involved in
access
>>>>>>> control to the irq vector space, can't it do the mapping?
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> yes, what I mean is, "before starting the domain" works for
IOAPIC IRQ,
>>>>>> not MSI. MSI will still through communcation between PCI
>>>>>> frontend/backend directly.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Oh, I see. Then it probably has to be a phydevop and let dom0
kernel do
>>>>> it. But there should be no reason to let domU use the map_irq
>>>>> physdev_op at all. 
>>>>> 
>>>>> -- Keir
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> Xen-devel mailing list
>>>>> Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>>>> http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel

Attachment: MSI_disable.patch
Description: MSI_disable.patch

Attachment: msi_irq_xen.patch
Description: msi_irq_xen.patch

Attachment: msi_kernel.patch
Description: msi_kernel.patch

Attachment: msi_passthrough.patch
Description: msi_passthrough.patch

Attachment: msix-permission.patch
Description: msix-permission.patch

Attachment: pirq_per_domain.patch
Description: pirq_per_domain.patch

_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>