Re: SOLVED: Re: [Xen-devel] Issue with pv_ops Kernel 2.6.31.6 and Xen [yinghai@xxxxxxxxxx: [PATCH 01/35] x86: fix sci on ioapic 1]

[Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@xxxxxxxx>]

On 02/16/2010 10:10 AM, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:
> On Sun, Feb 14, 2010 at 12:12:30AM +0100, Marcial Rion wrote:
>    
> > Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:
> >      
> > > FYI.
> > >
> > > ----- Forwarded message from Yinghai Lu<yinghai@xxxxxxxxxx>  -----
> > >
> > > Date: Tue, 09 Feb 2010 11:32:12 -0800
> > > From: Yinghai Lu<yinghai@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > > To: Ingo Molnar<mingo@xxxxxxx>, Thomas Gleixner<tglx@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
> > >         "H. Peter Anvin"<hpa@xxxxxxxxx>,
> > >         Andrew Morton<akpm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
> > >         Linus Torvalds<torvalds@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > Cc: Jesse Barnes<jbarnes@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
> > >         Christoph Lameter<cl@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
> > >         linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, linux-pci@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx,
> > >         Yinghai Lu<yinghai@xxxxxxxxxx>, stable@xxxxxxxxxx
> > > Subject: [PATCH 01/35] x86: fix sci on ioapic 1
> > >
> > > Thomas Renninger<trenn@xxxxxxx>  reported on IBM x3330
> > >
> > > booting a latest kernel on this machine results in:
> > >
> > > PCI: PCI BIOS revision 2.10 entry at 0xfd61c, last bus=1
> > > PCI: Using configuration type 1 for base access bio: create slab<bio-0>  at 0
> > > ACPI: SCI (IRQ30) allocation failed
> > > ACPI Exception: AE_NOT_ACQUIRED, Unable to install System Control Interrupt 
> > > handler (20090903/evevent-161)
> > > ACPI: Unable to start the ACPI Interpreter
> > >
> > > Later all kind of devices fail...
> > >
> > > and bisect it down to this commit:
> > > commit b9c61b70075c87a8612624736faf4a2de5b1ed30
> > >
> > >      x86/pci: update pirq_enable_irq() to setup io apic routing
> > >
> > > it turns out we need to set irq routing for the sci on ioapic1 early.
> > >
> > >        
> > Yes, this did the trick. Introduced the code changes manually in the
> >      
> That is great.
>
> .. snip..
>    
> > Question: Is it known when this piece of code will be introduced in the
> > "pv_ops Kernel tree"?
> >      
> Hmm.. Jeremy's plans are to re-base the pvops changes that went in
> 2.6.31.6 onto 2.6.32. The reason being that 2.6.32 has been choosen by
> many distributions as their next vehicle for release. The patches being
> mostly, if possible, related only to Xen.
>
> The patch I forwarded to you is targetted for 2.6.33 so it would not appear
> normally in 2.6.32 tree unles Greg KH choose to back-port it in. Greg is
> the maintainer of the 2.6.32 stable tree.
>
> I would recommend you e-mail Greg KH with this e-mail, explain your
> situation  and ask him if he wouldn't mind merging the patch in.
> Thought you might need to do some of the work yourself
> (as in, merge the patch in an earlier kernel) - it seems you already
> have done this so hopefully that shouldn't be a problem.
>
> Try it that way, as this way also the distributions will pick up the fix
> and you would be able to load any new distro on your box without having
> to manually recompile the kernel and such.
>    
Is that one change enough to fix the reported problem?  Can we just 
cherry-pick it over?  Or does it need a lot of supporting patches?
> Then when Jeremy revs up the xen/next tree to next stable rev (I think
> he will do this, not sure?), it will automatically be picked up (if Greg picks 
> it up in his tree).
>    
Yes.  At the moment xen/next is based on plain 2.6.32 because that is 
also an ancestor version of mainline git development.  Once the 2.6.32 
tree basically works (which should be close), then I can merge all the 
stable branch changes onto it and call it "xen/stable" or something.
    J

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