On Fri, 28 Jun 2013, Zhenzhong Duan wrote:
> On 2013-06-27 19:52, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
> > On Thu, 27 Jun 2013, Zhenzhong Duan wrote:
> > > On 2013-06-27 02:08, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
> > > > On Wed, 26 Jun 2013, Zhenzhong Duan wrote:
> > > > > On 2013-06-26 01:51, Stefano Stabellini
On Fri, 28 Jun 2013, Zhenzhong Duan wrote:
On 2013-06-27 19:52, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
On Thu, 27 Jun 2013, Zhenzhong Duan wrote:
On 2013-06-27 02:08, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
On Wed, 26 Jun 2013, Zhenzhong Duan wrote:
On 2013-06-26 01:51, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
On Tue,
On 2013-06-27 19:52, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
On Thu, 27 Jun 2013, Zhenzhong Duan wrote:
On 2013-06-27 02:08, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
On Wed, 26 Jun 2013, Zhenzhong Duan wrote:
On 2013-06-26 01:51, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
On Tue, 25 Jun 2013, DuanZhenzhong wrote:
Stefano Stabellini
On Thu, 27 Jun 2013, Zhenzhong Duan wrote:
> On 2013-06-27 02:08, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
> > On Wed, 26 Jun 2013, Zhenzhong Duan wrote:
> > > On 2013-06-26 01:51, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
> > > > On Tue, 25 Jun 2013, DuanZhenzhong wrote:
> > > > > Stefano Stabellini wrote:
> > > > > > Trimming
On Thu, 27 Jun 2013, Zhenzhong Duan wrote:
On 2013-06-27 02:08, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
On Wed, 26 Jun 2013, Zhenzhong Duan wrote:
On 2013-06-26 01:51, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
On Tue, 25 Jun 2013, DuanZhenzhong wrote:
Stefano Stabellini wrote:
Trimming some of the people
On 2013-06-27 19:52, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
On Thu, 27 Jun 2013, Zhenzhong Duan wrote:
On 2013-06-27 02:08, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
On Wed, 26 Jun 2013, Zhenzhong Duan wrote:
On 2013-06-26 01:51, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
On Tue, 25 Jun 2013, DuanZhenzhong wrote:
Stefano Stabellini
On 2013-06-27 02:08, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
On Wed, 26 Jun 2013, Zhenzhong Duan wrote:
On 2013-06-26 01:51, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
On Tue, 25 Jun 2013, DuanZhenzhong wrote:
Stefano Stabellini wrote:
Trimming some of the people in CC
On Mon, 24 Jun 2013, Zhenzhong Duan wrote:
On
On Wed, 26 Jun 2013, Zhenzhong Duan wrote:
> On 2013-06-26 01:51, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
> > On Tue, 25 Jun 2013, DuanZhenzhong wrote:
> > > Stefano Stabellini wrote:
> > > > Trimming some of the people in CC
> > > >
> > > > On Mon, 24 Jun 2013, Zhenzhong Duan wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > On
On Wed, 26 Jun 2013, Zhenzhong Duan wrote:
On 2013-06-26 01:51, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
On Tue, 25 Jun 2013, DuanZhenzhong wrote:
Stefano Stabellini wrote:
Trimming some of the people in CC
On Mon, 24 Jun 2013, Zhenzhong Duan wrote:
On 2013-06-20 22:21, Stefano
On 2013-06-27 02:08, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
On Wed, 26 Jun 2013, Zhenzhong Duan wrote:
On 2013-06-26 01:51, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
On Tue, 25 Jun 2013, DuanZhenzhong wrote:
Stefano Stabellini wrote:
Trimming some of the people in CC
On Mon, 24 Jun 2013, Zhenzhong Duan wrote:
On
On 2013-06-26 01:51, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
On Tue, 25 Jun 2013, DuanZhenzhong wrote:
Stefano Stabellini wrote:
Trimming some of the people in CC
On Mon, 24 Jun 2013, Zhenzhong Duan wrote:
On 2013-06-20 22:21, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
On Thu, 20 Jun 2013, Zhenzhong Duan
On Tue, 25 Jun 2013, DuanZhenzhong wrote:
> Stefano Stabellini wrote:
> > Trimming some of the people in CC
> >
> > On Mon, 24 Jun 2013, Zhenzhong Duan wrote:
> >
> > > On 2013-06-20 22:21, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
> > >
> > > > On Thu, 20 Jun 2013, Zhenzhong Duan wrote:
> > > >
>
On Tue, 25 Jun 2013, DuanZhenzhong wrote:
Stefano Stabellini wrote:
Trimming some of the people in CC
On Mon, 24 Jun 2013, Zhenzhong Duan wrote:
On 2013-06-20 22:21, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
On Thu, 20 Jun 2013, Zhenzhong Duan wrote:
On 2013-06-05
On 2013-06-26 01:51, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
On Tue, 25 Jun 2013, DuanZhenzhong wrote:
Stefano Stabellini wrote:
Trimming some of the people in CC
On Mon, 24 Jun 2013, Zhenzhong Duan wrote:
On 2013-06-20 22:21, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
On Thu, 20 Jun 2013, Zhenzhong Duan
Stefano Stabellini wrote:
Trimming some of the people in CC
On Mon, 24 Jun 2013, Zhenzhong Duan wrote:
On 2013-06-20 22:21, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
On Thu, 20 Jun 2013, Zhenzhong Duan wrote:
On 2013-06-05 20:50, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
On Wed, 5 Jun 2013,
Trimming some of the people in CC
On Mon, 24 Jun 2013, Zhenzhong Duan wrote:
> On 2013-06-20 22:21, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
> > On Thu, 20 Jun 2013, Zhenzhong Duan wrote:
> > > On 2013-06-05 20:50, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
> > > > On Wed, 5 Jun 2013, Zhenzhong Duan wrote:
> > > > > Stefano
On 2013-06-20 22:21, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
On Thu, 20 Jun 2013, Zhenzhong Duan wrote:
On 2013-06-05 20:50, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
On Wed, 5 Jun 2013, Zhenzhong Duan wrote:
Stefano Stabellini wrote:
On Tue, 21 May 2013, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
On Tue, 21 May 2013, Konrad
On 2013-06-20 22:21, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
On Thu, 20 Jun 2013, Zhenzhong Duan wrote:
On 2013-06-05 20:50, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
On Wed, 5 Jun 2013, Zhenzhong Duan wrote:
Stefano Stabellini wrote:
On Tue, 21 May 2013, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
On Tue, 21 May 2013, Konrad
Trimming some of the people in CC
On Mon, 24 Jun 2013, Zhenzhong Duan wrote:
On 2013-06-20 22:21, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
On Thu, 20 Jun 2013, Zhenzhong Duan wrote:
On 2013-06-05 20:50, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
On Wed, 5 Jun 2013, Zhenzhong Duan wrote:
Stefano Stabellini wrote:
Stefano Stabellini wrote:
Trimming some of the people in CC
On Mon, 24 Jun 2013, Zhenzhong Duan wrote:
On 2013-06-20 22:21, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
On Thu, 20 Jun 2013, Zhenzhong Duan wrote:
On 2013-06-05 20:50, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
On Wed, 5 Jun 2013,
On Thu, 20 Jun 2013, Zhenzhong Duan wrote:
> On 2013-06-05 20:50, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
> > On Wed, 5 Jun 2013, Zhenzhong Duan wrote:
> > > Stefano Stabellini wrote:
> > >
> > > On Tue, 21 May 2013, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
> > >
> > > On Tue, 21 May 2013, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:
>
On Thu, 20 Jun 2013, Zhenzhong Duan wrote:
On 2013-06-05 20:50, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
On Wed, 5 Jun 2013, Zhenzhong Duan wrote:
Stefano Stabellini wrote:
On Tue, 21 May 2013, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
On Tue, 21 May 2013, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:
Looking
On 2013-06-05 20:50, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
On Wed, 5 Jun 2013, Zhenzhong Duan wrote:
Stefano Stabellini wrote:
On Tue, 21 May 2013, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
On Tue, 21 May 2013, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:
Looking at the hypervisor code I couldn't see anything obviously
On 2013-06-05 20:50, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
On Wed, 5 Jun 2013, Zhenzhong Duan wrote:
Stefano Stabellini wrote:
On Tue, 21 May 2013, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
On Tue, 21 May 2013, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:
Looking at the hypervisor code I couldn't see anything obviously
On Wed, 5 Jun 2013, Zhenzhong Duan wrote:
> Stefano Stabellini wrote:
>
> On Tue, 21 May 2013, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
>
>
> On Tue, 21 May 2013, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:
>
>
> Looking at the hypervisor code I couldn't see anything obviously wrong.
>
>
> I think the
On Wed, 5 Jun 2013, Zhenzhong Duan wrote:
Stefano Stabellini wrote:
On Tue, 21 May 2013, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
On Tue, 21 May 2013, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:
Looking at the hypervisor code I couldn't see anything obviously wrong.
I think the culprit is
On Wed, May 29, 2013 at 06:50:41PM +0100, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
> On Tue, 21 May 2013, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
> > On Tue, 21 May 2013, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:
> > > > Looking at the hypervisor code I couldn't see anything obviously wrong.
> > >
> > > I think the culprit is
On Wed, May 29, 2013 at 06:50:41PM +0100, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
On Tue, 21 May 2013, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
On Tue, 21 May 2013, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:
Looking at the hypervisor code I couldn't see anything obviously wrong.
I think the culprit is physdev_unmap_pirq:
On Tue, 21 May 2013, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
> On Tue, 21 May 2013, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:
> > > Looking at the hypervisor code I couldn't see anything obviously wrong.
> >
> > I think the culprit is "physdev_unmap_pirq":
> >
> >if ( is_hvm_domain(d) )
On Tue, 21 May 2013, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
On Tue, 21 May 2013, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:
Looking at the hypervisor code I couldn't see anything obviously wrong.
I think the culprit is physdev_unmap_pirq:
if ( is_hvm_domain(d) )
>>> On 22.05.13 at 18:41, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:
> On Wed, May 22, 2013 at 04:25:10PM +0100, Jan Beulich wrote:
>> Okay, that clarifies it quite a bit. For one, I'll leave any of the
>> emuirq stuff to Stefano, who wrote this originally. And then, from
>> the beginning of this thread, I'm
On 22.05.13 at 18:41, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk konrad.w...@oracle.com wrote:
On Wed, May 22, 2013 at 04:25:10PM +0100, Jan Beulich wrote:
Okay, that clarifies it quite a bit. For one, I'll leave any of the
emuirq stuff to Stefano, who wrote this originally. And then, from
the beginning of this
On Wed, May 22, 2013 at 04:25:10PM +0100, Jan Beulich wrote:
> >>> On 22.05.13 at 17:14, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk
> >>> wrote:
> > The physdev_unmap_pirq (from PHYSDEVOP_unmap_pirq), only has this
> > check:
> > if (domain_pirq_to_emuirq(d, pirq) != IRQ_UNBOUND)
> >
> > and since the
>>> On 22.05.13 at 17:14, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:
> The physdev_unmap_pirq (from PHYSDEVOP_unmap_pirq), only has this
> check:
> if (domain_pirq_to_emuirq(d, pirq) != IRQ_UNBOUND)
>
> and since the arch.hvm.emuirq is IRQ_UNBOUND (-1), it does not
> call unmap_domain_pirq_emuirq. It
On Wed, May 22, 2013 at 10:37:39AM +0100, Jan Beulich wrote:
> >>> On 22.05.13 at 00:41, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk
> >>> wrote:
> > On Tue, May 21, 2013 at 10:50:09PM +0100, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
> >> We have to be careful about this: the point of PHYSDEVOP_get_free_pirq is
> >> that Linux can
>>> On 22.05.13 at 00:41, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:
> On Tue, May 21, 2013 at 10:50:09PM +0100, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
>> We have to be careful about this: the point of PHYSDEVOP_get_free_pirq is
>> that Linux can know for sure the pirq that is going to be used to map the
>> MSI by QEMU. If
On 22.05.13 at 00:41, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk konrad.w...@oracle.com wrote:
On Tue, May 21, 2013 at 10:50:09PM +0100, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
We have to be careful about this: the point of PHYSDEVOP_get_free_pirq is
that Linux can know for sure the pirq that is going to be used to map the
MSI
On Wed, May 22, 2013 at 10:37:39AM +0100, Jan Beulich wrote:
On 22.05.13 at 00:41, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk konrad.w...@oracle.com
wrote:
On Tue, May 21, 2013 at 10:50:09PM +0100, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
We have to be careful about this: the point of PHYSDEVOP_get_free_pirq is
that Linux
On 22.05.13 at 17:14, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk konrad.w...@oracle.com wrote:
The physdev_unmap_pirq (from PHYSDEVOP_unmap_pirq), only has this
check:
if (domain_pirq_to_emuirq(d, pirq) != IRQ_UNBOUND)
and since the arch.hvm.emuirq is IRQ_UNBOUND (-1), it does not
call
On Wed, May 22, 2013 at 04:25:10PM +0100, Jan Beulich wrote:
On 22.05.13 at 17:14, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk konrad.w...@oracle.com
wrote:
The physdev_unmap_pirq (from PHYSDEVOP_unmap_pirq), only has this
check:
if (domain_pirq_to_emuirq(d, pirq) != IRQ_UNBOUND)
and since the
On Tue, May 21, 2013 at 10:50:09PM +0100, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
> On Tue, 21 May 2013, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:
> > On Tue, May 21, 2013 at 05:51:02PM +0100, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
> > > On Tue, 21 May 2013, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:
> > > > > Looking at the hypervisor code I
On Tue, 21 May 2013, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:
> On Tue, May 21, 2013 at 05:51:02PM +0100, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
> > On Tue, 21 May 2013, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:
> > > > Looking at the hypervisor code I couldn't see anything obviously wrong.
> > >
> > > I think the culprit is
On Tue, May 21, 2013 at 05:51:02PM +0100, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
> On Tue, 21 May 2013, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:
> > > Looking at the hypervisor code I couldn't see anything obviously wrong.
> >
> > I think the culprit is "physdev_unmap_pirq":
> >
> >if ( is_hvm_domain(d) )
On Tue, 21 May 2013, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:
> > Looking at the hypervisor code I couldn't see anything obviously wrong.
>
> I think the culprit is "physdev_unmap_pirq":
>
>if ( is_hvm_domain(d) )
>
> {
> Looking at the hypervisor code I couldn't see anything obviously wrong.
I think the culprit is "physdev_unmap_pirq":
if ( is_hvm_domain(d) )
{
On 20/05/13 21:38, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:
>> At this point I think that upstream option is to save the PIRQ value and
>> re-use it.
>> Will post a patch for it.
>
> Here is the patch. It works for me when passing in a NIC driver.
>
>>From 509499568d1cdf1f2a3fb53773c991f4b063eb56 Mon Sep
On 20/05/13 21:38, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:
At this point I think that upstream option is to save the PIRQ value and
re-use it.
Will post a patch for it.
Here is the patch. It works for me when passing in a NIC driver.
From 509499568d1cdf1f2a3fb53773c991f4b063eb56 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00
Looking at the hypervisor code I couldn't see anything obviously wrong.
I think the culprit is physdev_unmap_pirq:
if ( is_hvm_domain(d) )
{
On Tue, 21 May 2013, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:
Looking at the hypervisor code I couldn't see anything obviously wrong.
I think the culprit is physdev_unmap_pirq:
if ( is_hvm_domain(d) )
{
On Tue, May 21, 2013 at 05:51:02PM +0100, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
On Tue, 21 May 2013, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:
Looking at the hypervisor code I couldn't see anything obviously wrong.
I think the culprit is physdev_unmap_pirq:
if ( is_hvm_domain(d) )
On Tue, 21 May 2013, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:
On Tue, May 21, 2013 at 05:51:02PM +0100, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
On Tue, 21 May 2013, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:
Looking at the hypervisor code I couldn't see anything obviously wrong.
I think the culprit is physdev_unmap_pirq:
On Tue, May 21, 2013 at 10:50:09PM +0100, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
On Tue, 21 May 2013, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:
On Tue, May 21, 2013 at 05:51:02PM +0100, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
On Tue, 21 May 2013, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:
Looking at the hypervisor code I couldn't see
> At this point I think that upstream option is to save the PIRQ value and
> re-use it.
> Will post a patch for it.
Here is the patch. It works for me when passing in a NIC driver.
>From 509499568d1cdf1f2a3fb53773c991f4b063eb56 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk
Date: Mon, 20
> > Hi Stefano,
> >
> > do you work out a patch for me to test?
>
> I'll be traveling/busy for a few weeks, maybe it's best if someone else
> picks up this work item.
This little test-case below should have worked:
#include
#include
#include
#include
#include
#include
#include
#include
On Mon, May 20, 2013 at 11:24:04AM +0100, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
> On Fri, 17 May 2013, Zhenzhong Duan wrote:
> > On 2013-05-15 17:41, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
> > > On Tue, 14 May 2013, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:
> > > > On Tue, May 14, 2013 at 02:49:50PM +0100, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
>
On Fri, 17 May 2013, Zhenzhong Duan wrote:
> On 2013-05-15 17:41, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
> > On Tue, 14 May 2013, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:
> > > On Tue, May 14, 2013 at 02:49:50PM +0100, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
> > > > On Mon, 13 May 2013, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:
> > > > > On Mon,
On Fri, 17 May 2013, Zhenzhong Duan wrote:
On 2013-05-15 17:41, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
On Tue, 14 May 2013, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:
On Tue, May 14, 2013 at 02:49:50PM +0100, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
On Mon, 13 May 2013, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:
On Mon, May 13, 2013 at
On Mon, May 20, 2013 at 11:24:04AM +0100, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
On Fri, 17 May 2013, Zhenzhong Duan wrote:
On 2013-05-15 17:41, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
On Tue, 14 May 2013, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:
On Tue, May 14, 2013 at 02:49:50PM +0100, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
On Mon,
Hi Stefano,
do you work out a patch for me to test?
I'll be traveling/busy for a few weeks, maybe it's best if someone else
picks up this work item.
This little test-case below should have worked:
#include linux/module.h
#include linux/kthread.h
#include linux/pagemap.h
#include
At this point I think that upstream option is to save the PIRQ value and
re-use it.
Will post a patch for it.
Here is the patch. It works for me when passing in a NIC driver.
From 509499568d1cdf1f2a3fb53773c991f4b063eb56 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk
On 2013-05-15 17:41, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
On Tue, 14 May 2013, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:
On Tue, May 14, 2013 at 02:49:50PM +0100, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
On Mon, 13 May 2013, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:
On Mon, May 13, 2013 at 06:24:46PM +0100, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
On Mon,
On 2013-05-15 17:41, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
On Tue, 14 May 2013, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:
On Tue, May 14, 2013 at 02:49:50PM +0100, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
On Mon, 13 May 2013, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:
On Mon, May 13, 2013 at 06:24:46PM +0100, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
On Mon,
On 2013-05-15 17:41, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
On Tue, 14 May 2013, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:
On Tue, May 14, 2013 at 02:49:50PM +0100, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
On Mon, 13 May 2013, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:
On Mon, May 13, 2013 at 06:24:46PM +0100, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
On Mon,
On Tue, 14 May 2013, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:
> On Tue, May 14, 2013 at 02:49:50PM +0100, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
> > On Mon, 13 May 2013, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:
> > > On Mon, May 13, 2013 at 06:24:46PM +0100, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
> > > > On Mon, 13 May 2013, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk
On Tue, 14 May 2013, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:
On Tue, May 14, 2013 at 02:49:50PM +0100, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
On Mon, 13 May 2013, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:
On Mon, May 13, 2013 at 06:24:46PM +0100, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
On Mon, 13 May 2013, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:
On 2013-05-15 17:41, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
On Tue, 14 May 2013, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:
On Tue, May 14, 2013 at 02:49:50PM +0100, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
On Mon, 13 May 2013, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:
On Mon, May 13, 2013 at 06:24:46PM +0100, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
On Mon,
On Tue, May 14, 2013 at 02:49:50PM +0100, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
> On Mon, 13 May 2013, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:
> > On Mon, May 13, 2013 at 06:24:46PM +0100, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
> > > On Mon, 13 May 2013, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:
> > > > On Mon, May 13, 2013 at 03:50:52PM +0100,
On Mon, 13 May 2013, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:
> On Mon, May 13, 2013 at 06:24:46PM +0100, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
> > On Mon, 13 May 2013, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:
> > > On Mon, May 13, 2013 at 03:50:52PM +0100, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
> > > > On Mon, 13 May 2013, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk
On Mon, 13 May 2013, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:
On Mon, May 13, 2013 at 06:24:46PM +0100, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
On Mon, 13 May 2013, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:
On Mon, May 13, 2013 at 03:50:52PM +0100, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
On Mon, 13 May 2013, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:
On Tue, May 14, 2013 at 02:49:50PM +0100, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
On Mon, 13 May 2013, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:
On Mon, May 13, 2013 at 06:24:46PM +0100, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
On Mon, 13 May 2013, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:
On Mon, May 13, 2013 at 03:50:52PM +0100, Stefano
On Mon, May 13, 2013 at 06:24:46PM +0100, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
> On Mon, 13 May 2013, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:
> > On Mon, May 13, 2013 at 03:50:52PM +0100, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
> > > On Mon, 13 May 2013, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:
> > > > On Mon, May 13, 2013 at 12:06:43PM +0100,
On Mon, 13 May 2013, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:
> On Mon, May 13, 2013 at 03:50:52PM +0100, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
> > On Mon, 13 May 2013, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:
> > > On Mon, May 13, 2013 at 12:06:43PM +0100, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
> > > > On Fri, 10 May 2013, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk
On Mon, May 13, 2013 at 03:50:52PM +0100, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
> On Mon, 13 May 2013, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:
> > On Mon, May 13, 2013 at 12:06:43PM +0100, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
> > > On Fri, 10 May 2013, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:
> > > > On Wed, May 08, 2013 at 04:18:24PM +0800,
On Mon, 13 May 2013, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:
> On Mon, May 13, 2013 at 12:06:43PM +0100, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
> > On Fri, 10 May 2013, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:
> > > On Wed, May 08, 2013 at 04:18:24PM +0800, Zhenzhong Duan wrote:
> > > > When driver load and unload in a loop, pirq
On Mon, May 13, 2013 at 12:06:43PM +0100, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
> On Fri, 10 May 2013, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:
> > On Wed, May 08, 2013 at 04:18:24PM +0800, Zhenzhong Duan wrote:
> > > When driver load and unload in a loop, pirq will exhaust finally.
> > > Try to use the same pirq which
On Fri, 10 May 2013, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:
> On Wed, May 08, 2013 at 04:18:24PM +0800, Zhenzhong Duan wrote:
> > When driver load and unload in a loop, pirq will exhaust finally.
> > Try to use the same pirq which was already mapped and binded at first time
>
> So what happens if I unload
On 2013-05-11 02:53, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:
On Wed, May 08, 2013 at 04:18:24PM +0800, Zhenzhong Duan wrote:
When driver load and unload in a loop, pirq will exhaust finally.
Try to use the same pirq which was already mapped and binded at first time
So what happens if I unload and reload
On 2013-05-11 02:53, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:
On Wed, May 08, 2013 at 04:18:24PM +0800, Zhenzhong Duan wrote:
When driver load and unload in a loop, pirq will exhaust finally.
Try to use the same pirq which was already mapped and binded at first time
So what happens if I unload and reload
On Fri, 10 May 2013, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:
On Wed, May 08, 2013 at 04:18:24PM +0800, Zhenzhong Duan wrote:
When driver load and unload in a loop, pirq will exhaust finally.
Try to use the same pirq which was already mapped and binded at first time
So what happens if I unload and
On Mon, May 13, 2013 at 12:06:43PM +0100, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
On Fri, 10 May 2013, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:
On Wed, May 08, 2013 at 04:18:24PM +0800, Zhenzhong Duan wrote:
When driver load and unload in a loop, pirq will exhaust finally.
Try to use the same pirq which was
On Mon, 13 May 2013, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:
On Mon, May 13, 2013 at 12:06:43PM +0100, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
On Fri, 10 May 2013, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:
On Wed, May 08, 2013 at 04:18:24PM +0800, Zhenzhong Duan wrote:
When driver load and unload in a loop, pirq will exhaust
On Mon, May 13, 2013 at 03:50:52PM +0100, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
On Mon, 13 May 2013, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:
On Mon, May 13, 2013 at 12:06:43PM +0100, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
On Fri, 10 May 2013, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:
On Wed, May 08, 2013 at 04:18:24PM +0800, Zhenzhong
On Mon, 13 May 2013, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:
On Mon, May 13, 2013 at 03:50:52PM +0100, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
On Mon, 13 May 2013, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:
On Mon, May 13, 2013 at 12:06:43PM +0100, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
On Fri, 10 May 2013, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:
On Mon, May 13, 2013 at 06:24:46PM +0100, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
On Mon, 13 May 2013, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:
On Mon, May 13, 2013 at 03:50:52PM +0100, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
On Mon, 13 May 2013, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:
On Mon, May 13, 2013 at 12:06:43PM +0100, Stefano
On Wed, May 08, 2013 at 04:18:24PM +0800, Zhenzhong Duan wrote:
> When driver load and unload in a loop, pirq will exhaust finally.
> Try to use the same pirq which was already mapped and binded at first time
So what happens if I unload and reload two drivers in random order?
> when driver
On Wed, May 08, 2013 at 04:18:24PM +0800, Zhenzhong Duan wrote:
When driver load and unload in a loop, pirq will exhaust finally.
Try to use the same pirq which was already mapped and binded at first time
So what happens if I unload and reload two drivers in random order?
when driver loaded.
When driver load and unload in a loop, pirq will exhaust finally.
Try to use the same pirq which was already mapped and binded at first time
when driver loaded.
Read pirq from msix entry and test if data is XEN_PIRQ_MSI_DATA
xen_irq_from_pirq(pirq) < 0 checking is wrong as irq will be freed
when
When driver load and unload in a loop, pirq will exhaust finally.
Try to use the same pirq which was already mapped and binded at first time
when driver loaded.
Read pirq from msix entry and test if data is XEN_PIRQ_MSI_DATA
xen_irq_from_pirq(pirq) 0 checking is wrong as irq will be freed
when
88 matches
Mail list logo
