Re: [Xen-devel] Upstream qemu-xen, log verbosity and compile errors when enabling debug, filenaming

[Sander Eikelenboom <linux@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Monday, December 10, 2012, 1:59:51 PM, you wrote:

> On Fri, 7 Dec 2012, Sander Eikelenboom wrote:
>> Friday, December 7, 2012, 6:01:43 PM, you wrote:
>> 
>> > On Thu, 6 Dec 2012, Sander Eikelenboom wrote:
>> >> Hi All,
>> >> 
>> >> Yesterday I have tried building and using upstream qemu and seabios.
>> >> Config.mk:
>> >> QEMU_UPSTREAM_URL ?= git://git.qemu.org/qemu.git
>> >> QEMU_UPSTREAM_REVISION ?= master
>> >> 
>> >> SEABIOS_UPSTREAM_URL ?= git://git.qemu.org/seabios.git
>> >> SEABIOS_UPSTREAM_TAG ?= master
>> >> 
>> >> And i'm happy to say that it works quite ok, even with (secondary pci) 
>> >> pci-passthrough ( using an ATI gfx adapter and windows7 as guest os) :-).
>> >> 
>> >> But it seems to have an issue with a USB controller which is trying to 
>> >> use msi-X interrupts, which makes xl dmesg report:
>> >> (XEN) [2012-12-06 16:07:24] vmsi.c:108:d32767 Unsupported delivery mode 3
>> >> and when "pci_msitranslate=0" is set the error still occurs, only this 
>> >> time the correct domain number is reported, instead of the 32767.
>> >> 
>> >> 
>> >> However, when trying to debug, i noticed although making a debug build 
>> >> (make debug=y && make debug=y install), qemu-dm-<guestname>.log stays 
>> >> almost empty.
>> >> It seems all the defines related to debugging are not set.
>> >> 
>> >> - Would it be appropriated to enable them all when making a debug build ?
>> >> - Would it be wise to also have some more verbose logging when not 
>> >> running a debug build ?
>> 
>> > Yes and yes
>> 
>> >> - And if yes, what would be the nicest way to set the defines ?
>> 
>> > My guess is that it would be enough to turn on XEN_PT_LOGGING_ENABLED by
>> > default
>> 
>> >> - Should the naming of the debug defines be made more consistent ?
>> 
>> > Yes
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> >> 
>> >> When enabling these debug defines by hand:
>> >> 
>> >> xen-all.c
>> >> #define DEBUG_XEN
>> >> 
>> >> xen-mapcache.c
>> >> #define MAPCACHE_DEBUG
>> >> 
>> >> hw/xen-host-pci-device.c
>> >> #define XEN_HOST_PCI_DEVICE_DEBUG
>> >> 
>> >> hw/xen_platform.c
>> >> #define DEBUG_PLATFORM
>> >> 
>> >> hw/xen_pt.h
>> >> #define XEN_PT_LOGGING_ENABLED
>> >> #define XEN_PT_DEBUG_PCI_CONFIG_ACCESS
>> >> 
>> >> I get a lot of compile errors related to wrong types in the debug 
>> >> printf's.
>> 
>> > That's really bad. I would like upstream QEMU to have the same level of
>> > logging as qemu-xen-traditional by default. And they should compile.
>> 
>> 
>> >> Another thing that occurred to me was that the file naming doesn't seem 
>> >> to be overly consistent:
>> >> 
>> >> xen-all.c
>> >> xen-mapcache.c
>> >> xen-mapcache.h
>> >> xen-stub.c
>> >> xen_apic.c
>> >> hw/xen_backend.c
>> >> hw/xen_backend.h
>> >> hw/xen_blkif.h
>> >> hw/xen_common.h
>> >> hw/xen_console.c
>> >> hw/xen_devconfig.c
>> >> hw/xen_disk.c
>> >> hw/xen_domainbuild.c
>> >> hw/xen_domainbuild.h
>> >> hw/xenfb.c
>> >> hw/xen.h
>> >> hw/xen-host-pci-device.c
>> >> hw/xen-host-pci-device.h
>> >> hw/xen_machine_pv.c
>> >> hw/xen_nic.c
>> >> hw/xen_platform.c
>> >> hw/xen_pt.c
>> >> hw/xen_pt_config_init.c
>> >> hw/xen_pt.h
>> >> hw/xen_pt_msi.c
>> >> 
>> >> Would it be worthwhile to make it:
>> >> - consistent all underscore or all minus ?
>> >> - allways xen_ (or xen- depending on the above) ?
>> 
>> > Yes, definitely.
>> > Given that the development window for QEMU 1.4 has just opened might
>> > even be the right time to make these changes.
>> 
>> > Are you volunteering? :)
>> 
>> Erhmm yes i think i should be able to accomplish this :-)
>> And yes i did notice the 1.3 release :-)
>> 
>> Patches would be directly against the qemu-upstream git-tree, first round to 
>> xen-devel and when acked send to qemu-list ?

> It is best to CC qemu-devel from the start, they are used to high levels
> of traffic anyway ;)

Ok

>> For the filerenaming, the rest of the qemu sources seems to be mixed, but i 
>> think it would be more neat for the xen part to stick to one of the two .. 
>> but which one would be prefered ?
>> 1. all underscores
>> 2. all minus

> I would go for 1.
> However I would keep the renaming patch separate from the others,
> because it could start a flame war between underscores supporters
> and minuses supporters :)

Ok i thought about that :-)

> The other changes (better default debug levels, working debugs, debug
> functions naming) should all be non-controversial.

Ok will send those first


_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel