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] PCI passthrough issue

To: xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] PCI passthrough issue
From: Jean Baptiste Favre <xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 02 Feb 2011 12:33:04 +0100
Delivery-date: Wed, 02 Feb 2011 03:34:00 -0800
Envelope-to: www-data@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <1296644379.13091.368.camel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
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: <4D2E28C5.30203@xxxxxxxxxxx> <4D2EE1DE.5070006@xxxxxxxxxxx> <4D2F5009.2090701@xxxxxxxxxxx> <20110113201922.GA20494@xxxxxxxxxxxx> <4D2F6431.8030606@xxxxxxxxxxx> <20110114145350.GB7371@xxxxxxxxxxxx> <4D30DC5A.9080303@xxxxxxxxxxx> <4D340504.7020203@xxxxxxxxxxx> <4D344AF4.80301@xxxxxxxxxxx> <4D3AB003.3040603@xxxxxxxxxxx> <20110127202755.GA4194@xxxxxxxxxxxx> <4D41E7EE.4060502@xxxxxxxxxxx> <4D42E520.9020107@xxxxxxxxxxx> <1296560086.13091.131.camel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <4D47F9CF.2040107@xxxxxxxxxxx> <1296566401.13091.171.camel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <4D4814CE.5050303@xxxxxxxxxxx> <1296569931.13091.194.camel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <4D48234F.2020907@xxxxxxxxxxx> <4D4828D9.6090601@xxxxxxxxxxx> <1296577389.13091.288.camel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <4D488355.8010706@xxxxxxxxxxx> <1296638873.13091.315.camel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <4D4930F3.608@xxxxxxxxxxx> <1296644379.13091.368.camel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Reply-to: xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sender: xen-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; fr; rv:1.9.2.13) Gecko/20101207 Lightning/1.0b2 Thunderbird/3.1.7
Hello,

Le 02/02/2011 11:59, Ian Campbell a écrit :
> [...]
> >>> No sure I've ever posted that logs. But I can redo my tests :)
> >>
> >> yes, please do that.
> > Please find attached both console startup logs with 256M and 512M:
> > 256M_domU_console_logs.txt
> > 512M_domU_console_logs.txt
>
> Thanks, I stripped the timestamps and cleaned up some differences due to
> missing carriage returns, those versions are attached.
>
> Interesting bits of diff (- == 256, + == 512) are:
>         -Allocating PCI resources starting at 10800000 (gap:
> 10800000:ef800000)
>         +Allocating PCI resources starting at 20800000 (gap:
> 20800000:df800000)
>
> So the PCI resources are higher and smaller in the 512MB case.
>
>         -Placing 64MB software IO TLB between cbd7ee40 - cfd7ee40
>         -software IO TLB at phys 0xbd7ee40 - 0xfd7ee40
>         +Placing 64MB software IO TLB between dbb1a000 - dfb1a000
>         +software IO TLB at phys 0x1bb1a000 - 0x1fb1a000
>
> Fair enough?
>
>          sky2: driver version 1.28
>         -sky2 0000:00:00.0: BAR 0: set to [mem 0xfeb00000-0xfeb03fff
> 64bit] (PCI address [0xfeb00000-0xfeb03fff])
>         -sky2 0000:00:00.0: BAR 2: set to [io  0xe800-0xe8ff] (PCI
> address [0xe800-0xe8ff])
>         -sky2 0000:00:00.0: enabling device (0000 -> 0003)
>          sky2 0000:00:00.0: Xen PCI enabling IRQ: 18
>          sky2 0000:00:00.0: Yukon-2 EC Ultra chip revision 3
>          sky2 0000:00:00.0: eth0: addr 00:1f:c6:eb:71:43
>
> So there is some sort of remapping going on in the 256MB case? (or the
> 512MB logs are missing a bit, which can happen). Can you post the
> content of domU's /proc/{interrupts,iomem,ioports} for both cases?
Please find them attached.
I also join last full console logs for both 256M and 512M: I saw "Call
Trace" for 256M I did not had last time.

> >> Please can you also collect and post the information from ifconfig and
> >> ethtool -S which I asked for earlier.
> > Attached as well:
> > 256_domU_ifconfig_ping_ethtool.txt
> > 512_domU_ifconfig_ping_ethtool.txt
>
> Thanks. The interesting bit here is that the 256MB case is registering
> RX dropped frames. 512_domU_ifconfig_ping_ethtool.txt did not include an
> ifconfig after the experiment but I assume the dropped frames are not
> present there.
I did not include second ifconfig for 512M as ping always works with
512M memory.
As far as I can remember, I did not noticed anything special.

> The rx_dropped statistic is only cranked in a small number of places,
> once in the driver and a handful in the networking core, only one of the
> core cases looks likely to be relevant. The following patch should help
> us figure out where the frames are dropped...
Let's patch Debian 2.6.37 32bits kernel so :)

Regards,
JB

Attachment: 256M_domU_proc_outputs.txt
Description: Text document

Attachment: 512M_domU_console_logs_2.txt
Description: Text document

Attachment: 512M_domU_proc_outputs.txt
Description: Text document

Attachment: 256M_domU_console_logs_2.txt
Description: Text document

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