On 2015/6/15 23:01, Wei Liu wrote:
On Mon, Jun 15, 2015 at 09:50:49AM +0800, Chen, Tiejun wrote:
[...]
+ uint32_t flag,
+ uint16_t seg,
+ uint8_t bus,
+ uint8_t devfn,
+ unsigned int *nr_entries
On 2015/6/12 17:20, Chen, Tiejun wrote:
On 2015/6/12 16:45, Jan Beulich wrote:
On 12.06.15 at 08:31, tiejun.c...@intel.com wrote:
On 2015/6/11 17:28, Tian, Kevin wrote:
From: Chen, Tiejun
Sent: Thursday, June 11, 2015 9:15 AM
@@ -1940,7 +1942,8 @@ static int intel_iommu_remove_device(u8
devfn
On 2015/6/13 0:02, Wei Liu wrote:
On Thu, Jun 11, 2015 at 09:15:20AM +0800, Tiejun Chen wrote:
This patch introduces user configurable parameters to specify RDM
resource and according policies,
Global RDM parameter:
rdm = type=none/host,reserve=strict/relaxed
Per-device RDM parameter:
On 2015/6/13 0:17, Wei Liu wrote:
On Thu, Jun 11, 2015 at 09:15:21AM +0800, Tiejun Chen wrote:
This patch passes our rdm reservation policy inside libxl
when we assign a device or attach a device.
Signed-off-by: Tiejun Chen tiejun.c...@intel.com
---
docs/man/xl.pod.1 | 7 ++-
On 2015/6/13 0:39, Wei Liu wrote:
On Thu, Jun 11, 2015 at 09:15:22AM +0800, Tiejun Chen wrote:
[...]
+++ b/tools/libxc/xc_hvm_build_x86.c
@@ -21,6 +21,7 @@
#include stdlib.h
#include unistd.h
#include zlib.h
+#include assert.h
#include xg_private.h
#include xc_private.h
@@ -270,7
On 2015/6/12 23:43, Wei Liu wrote:
On Thu, Jun 11, 2015 at 09:15:19AM +0800, Tiejun Chen wrote:
[...]
-static int next_bdf(char **str, int *seg, int *bus, int *dev, int *func)
+static int next_bdf(char **str, int *seg, int *bus, int *dev, int *func,
+int *flag)
This is
On 2015/6/13 0:43, Wei Liu wrote:
On Thu, Jun 11, 2015 at 09:15:23AM +0800, Tiejun Chen wrote:
Here we'll construct a basic guest e820 table via
XENMEM_set_memory_map. This table includes lowmem, highmem
and RDMs if they exist. And hvmloader would need this info
later.
Signed-off-by: Tiejun
On 2015/6/11 17:38, Tian, Kevin wrote:
From: Chen, Tiejun
Sent: Thursday, June 11, 2015 9:15 AM
Now we get this map layout by call XENMEM_memory_map then
save them into one global variable memory_map[]. It should
include lowmem range, rdm range and highmem range. Note
rdm range and highmem
On 2015/6/11 17:59, Tian, Kevin wrote:
From: Chen, Tiejun
Sent: Thursday, June 11, 2015 9:15 AM
Now we can use that memory map to build our final
e820 table but it may need to reorder all e820
entries.
Signed-off-by: Tiejun Chen tiejun.c...@intel.com
---
tools/firmware/hvmloader/e820.c | 62
On 2015/6/12 16:04, Jan Beulich wrote:
On 12.06.15 at 04:10, tiejun.c...@intel.com wrote:
On 2015/6/11 20:52, Tim Deegan wrote:
which would be better handeld explicitly:
if ( p2mt == p2m_invalid || p2mt == p2m_mmio_dm )
...
So if I'm correct, we should do this check
On 2015/6/11 18:25, Tian, Kevin wrote:
From: Chen, Tiejun
Sent: Thursday, June 11, 2015 9:15 AM
Currently we're intending to cover this kind of devices
we're - we're not?
I mean currently we want to handle this shared case *simply* so I think
its still we're, right?
with shared RMRR
On 2015/6/11 17:28, Tian, Kevin wrote:
From: Chen, Tiejun
Sent: Thursday, June 11, 2015 9:15 AM
This patch extends the existing hypercall to support rdm reservation policy.
We return error or just throw out a warning message depending on whether
the policy is strict or relaxed when reserving
On 2015/6/12 13:59, Tian, Kevin wrote:
From: Chen, Tiejun
Sent: Friday, June 12, 2015 1:58 PM
On 2015/6/12 10:43, Chen, Tiejun wrote:
On 2015/6/11 22:07, Tim Deegan wrote:
At 17:31 +0800 on 11 Jun (1434043916), Chen, Tiejun wrote:
while ( base_pfn end_pfn )
{
-int
On 2015/6/11 17:51, Tian, Kevin wrote:
From: Chen, Tiejun
Sent: Thursday, June 11, 2015 9:15 AM
When allocating mmio address for PCI bars, we need to make
sure they don't overlap with reserved regions.
Signed-off-by: Tiejun Chen tiejun.c...@intel.com
---
tools/firmware/hvmloader/pci.c | 36
On 2015/6/12 16:45, Jan Beulich wrote:
On 12.06.15 at 08:31, tiejun.c...@intel.com wrote:
On 2015/6/11 17:28, Tian, Kevin wrote:
From: Chen, Tiejun
Sent: Thursday, June 11, 2015 9:15 AM
@@ -1940,7 +1942,8 @@ static int intel_iommu_remove_device(u8 devfn, struct
pci_dev
*pdev
On 2015/6/11 18:02, Tian, Kevin wrote:
From: Chen, Tiejun
Sent: Thursday, June 11, 2015 9:15 AM
This patch passes rdm reservation policy to xc_assign_device() so the policy
is checked when assigning devices to a VM.
Signed-off-by: Tiejun Chen tiejun.c...@intel.com
---
tools/libxc/include
On 2015/6/11 18:22, Tian, Kevin wrote:
From: Chen, Tiejun
Sent: Thursday, June 11, 2015 9:15 AM
Before we refine RMRR mechanism, USB RMRR may conflict with guest bios
region so we always ignore USB RMRR.
If USB RMRR conflicts with guest bios, the conflict is always there
before and after your
On 2015/6/11 18:19, Tian, Kevin wrote:
From: Chen, Tiejun
Sent: Thursday, June 11, 2015 9:15 AM
While building a VM, HVM domain builder provides struct hvm_info_table{}
to help hvmloader. Currently it includes two fields to construct guest
e820 table by hvmloader, low_mem_pgend
On 2015/6/11 17:14, Tian, Kevin wrote:
From: Chen, Tiejun
Sent: Thursday, June 11, 2015 9:15 AM
RMRR reserved regions must be setup in the pfn space with an identity
mapping to reported mfn. However existing code has problem to setup
correct mapping when VT-d shares EPT page table, so lead
On 2015/6/11 16:42, Tian, Kevin wrote:
From: Jan Beulich [mailto:jbeul...@suse.com]
Sent: Thursday, June 11, 2015 3:28 PM
On 11.06.15 at 03:15, tiejun.c...@intel.com wrote:
v3:
* Rearrange all patches orderly as Wei suggested
* Rebase on the latest tree
* Address some Wei's comments on tools
On 2015/6/11 17:00, Tian, Kevin wrote:
From: Chen, Tiejun
Sent: Thursday, June 11, 2015 9:15 AM
We will create this sort of identity mapping as follows:
If the gfn space is unoccupied, we just set the mapping. If the space
is already occupied by 1:1 mappings, do nothing. Failed for any
other
On 2015/6/11 17:23, Jan Beulich wrote:
On 11.06.15 at 10:23, tiejun.c...@intel.com wrote:
On 2015/6/11 15:33, Jan Beulich wrote:
On 11.06.15 at 03:15, tiejun.c...@intel.com wrote:
We will create this sort of identity mapping as follows:
If the gfn space is unoccupied, we just set the
On 2015/6/12 10:43, Chen, Tiejun wrote:
On 2015/6/11 22:07, Tim Deegan wrote:
At 17:31 +0800 on 11 Jun (1434043916), Chen, Tiejun wrote:
while ( base_pfn end_pfn )
{
-int err = intel_iommu_map_page(d, base_pfn, base_pfn,
-
IOMMUF_readable|IOMMUF_writable);
+int
On 2015/6/11 20:52, Tim Deegan wrote:
Hi,
At 09:15 +0800 on 11 Jun (1434014109), Tiejun Chen wrote:
* Two changes for runtime cycle
patch #2,xen/x86/p2m: introduce set_identity_p2m_entry, on hypervisor side
a. Introduce paging_mode_translate()
Otherwise, we'll see this error when
On 2015/6/11 22:07, Tim Deegan wrote:
At 17:31 +0800 on 11 Jun (1434043916), Chen, Tiejun wrote:
while ( base_pfn end_pfn )
{
-int err = intel_iommu_map_page(d, base_pfn, base_pfn,
- IOMMUF_readable|IOMMUF_writable);
+int err
On 2015/6/11 15:33, Jan Beulich wrote:
On 11.06.15 at 03:15, tiejun.c...@intel.com wrote:
We will create this sort of identity mapping as follows:
If the gfn space is unoccupied, we just set the mapping. If the space
is already occupied by 1:1 mappings, do nothing. Failed for any
other cases.
On 2015/6/7 19:27, Wei Liu wrote:
On Wed, Jun 03, 2015 at 10:58:31AM +0800, Chen, Tiejun wrote:
On 2015/6/3 0:36, Wei Liu wrote:
On Fri, May 22, 2015 at 05:35:08PM +0800, Tiejun Chen wrote:
This patch passes rdm reservation policy to xc_assign_device() so the policy
is checked when assigning
On 2015/6/7 19:06, Wei Liu wrote:
On Wed, Jun 03, 2015 at 09:35:16AM +0800, Chen, Tiejun wrote:
[...]
+reserved regions explicitly. And using host to include all reserved regions
+reported on this platform which is good to handle hotplug scenario. In the
+future this parameter may be further
On 2015/6/7 19:20, Wei Liu wrote:
On Wed, Jun 03, 2015 at 10:25:47AM +0800, Chen, Tiejun wrote:
[...]
+static struct xen_reserved_device_memory
+*xc_device_get_rdm(libxl__gc *gc,
+ uint32_t flag,
+ uint16_t seg,
+ uint8_t bus
On 2015/6/3 0:36, Wei Liu wrote:
On Fri, May 22, 2015 at 05:35:08PM +0800, Tiejun Chen wrote:
This patch passes rdm reservation policy to xc_assign_device() so the policy
is checked when assigning devices to a VM.
Signed-off-by: Tiejun Chen tiejun.c...@intel.com
---
+=item Brdm= RDM_RESERVE_STRING
Stray space after before and after RDM_RESERVE_STRING.
Sure,
=item Brdm=RDM_RESERVE_STRING
+
+(HVM/x86 only) Specifies the information about Reserved Device Memory (RDM),
+which is necessary to enable robust device passthrough usage. One example of
On 2015/6/3 0:29, Wei Liu wrote:
On Fri, May 22, 2015 at 05:35:04PM +0800, Tiejun Chen wrote:
While building a VM, HVM domain builder provides struct hvm_info_table{}
to help hvmloader. Currently it includes two fields to construct guest
e820 table by hvmloader, low_mem_pgend and
On 2015/5/28 15:55, Jan Beulich wrote:
On 28.05.15 at 07:48, tiejun.c...@intel.com wrote:
On 2015/5/22 17:46, Jan Beulich wrote:
On 22.05.15 at 11:35, tiejun.c...@intel.com wrote:
As you know all devices are owned by Dom0 firstly before we create any
DomU, right? Do we allow Dom0 still own a
On 2015/5/28 20:27, Jan Beulich wrote:
On 22.05.15 at 11:35, tiejun.c...@intel.com wrote:
--- a/xen/arch/x86/mm/p2m.c
+++ b/xen/arch/x86/mm/p2m.c
@@ -898,6 +898,36 @@ int set_mmio_p2m_entry(struct domain *d, unsigned long
gfn, mfn_t mfn,
return set_typed_p2m_entry(d, gfn, mfn,
On 2015/5/22 17:46, Jan Beulich wrote:
On 22.05.15 at 11:35, tiejun.c...@intel.com wrote:
As you know all devices are owned by Dom0 firstly before we create any
DomU, right? Do we allow Dom0 still own a group device while assign another
device in the same group?
Clearly not, or - just like
On 2015/5/25 18:02, Julien Grall wrote:
On 25/05/2015 04:09, Chen, Tiejun wrote:
On 2015/5/22 18:33, Julien Grall wrote:
Hi,
On 22/05/2015 10:35, Tiejun Chen wrote:
diff --git a/xen/include/public/domctl.h b/xen/include/public/domctl.h
index 0c0ea4a..203c80e 100644
--- a/xen/include
On 2015/5/25 19:42, Julien Grall wrote:
Hi,
On 25/05/2015 12:50, Chen, Tiejun wrote:
On 2015/5/25 18:02, Julien Grall wrote:
On 25/05/2015 04:09, Chen, Tiejun wrote:
On 2015/5/22 18:33, Julien Grall wrote:
Hi,
On 22/05/2015 10:35, Tiejun Chen wrote:
diff --git a/xen/include/public
On 2015/5/22 18:33, Julien Grall wrote:
Hi,
On 22/05/2015 10:35, Tiejun Chen wrote:
diff --git a/xen/include/public/domctl.h b/xen/include/public/domctl.h
index 0c0ea4a..203c80e 100644
--- a/xen/include/public/domctl.h
+++ b/xen/include/public/domctl.h
@@ -499,6 +499,11 @@ struct
On 2015/5/22 18:25, Julien Grall wrote:
Hi,
On 22/05/2015 10:35, Tiejun Chen wrote:
Here we'll construct a basic guest e820 table via
XENMEM_set_memory_map. This table includes lowmem, highmem
and RDMs if they exist. And hvmloader would need this info
later.
Signed-off-by: Tiejun Chen
On 2015/5/20 18:06, Jan Beulich wrote:
On 20.05.15 at 08:53, tiejun.c...@intel.com wrote:
--- a/xen/drivers/passthrough/pci.c
+++ b/xen/drivers/passthrough/pci.c
@@ -905,7 +905,7 @@ out:
}
/*
- * detect pci device, return 0 if it exists, or return 0
+ * detect pci device, return 1 if it
On 2015/5/20 16:36, Wei Liu wrote:
On Wed, May 20, 2015 at 01:27:56PM +0800, Chen, Tiejun wrote:
[...]
We have this definition,
+libxl_rdm_reserve_type = Enumeration(rdm_reserve_type, [
+(0, none),
+(1, host),
+])
If we set 'type=none', this means we would do nothing actually
that doesn't affect memory layout.
There should be no change in the generated guest memory layout.
Signed-off-by: Wei Liu wei.l...@citrix.com
Cc: Ian Campbell ian.campb...@citrix.com
Cc: Ian Jackson ian.jack...@eu.citrix.com
---
Cc: Chen, Tiejun tiejun.c...@intel.com
This might affect your RMRR
On 2015/5/19 4:00, Wei Liu wrote:
On Thu, May 14, 2015 at 04:27:45PM +0800, Chen, Tiejun wrote:
On 2015/5/11 19:32, Wei Liu wrote:
On Mon, May 11, 2015 at 04:09:53PM +0800, Chen, Tiejun wrote:
On 2015/5/8 22:43, Wei Liu wrote:
Sorry for the late review. This series fell through the crack
On 2015/5/19 17:42, Wei Liu wrote:
On Tue, May 19, 2015 at 11:16:33AM +0800, Chen, Tiejun wrote:
On 2015/5/19 3:17, Wei Liu wrote:
[...]
rdm = [ 'host, reserve=POLICY' ]
OK, so this is a specific example in vtd.txt. Last time I misread it as
part of the manpage.
I think you meant
On 2015/5/19 19:00, Wei Liu wrote:
On Tue, May 19, 2015 at 06:50:11PM +0800, Chen, Tiejun wrote:
On 2015/5/19 17:42, Wei Liu wrote:
[...]
want you want?
We have a little bit of complexity here,
Default per-device RDM policy is 'force', while default global RDM policy
is 'try'. When both
On 2015/5/15 14:56, Jan Beulich wrote:
On 15.05.15 at 08:39, tiejun.c...@intel.com wrote:
On 2015/5/15 14:25, Jan Beulich wrote:
On 15.05.15 at 08:11, tiejun.c...@intel.com wrote:
Even we may separate the
low memory to construct memory_map.map[]...
???
Sorry I just mean that the low
On 2015/5/15 15:34, Jan Beulich wrote:
On 15.05.15 at 09:11, tiejun.c...@intel.com wrote:
On 2015/5/15 14:56, Jan Beulich wrote:
On 15.05.15 at 08:39, tiejun.c...@intel.com wrote:
On 2015/5/15 14:25, Jan Beulich wrote:
On 15.05.15 at 08:11, tiejun.c...@intel.com wrote:
Even we may separate
On 2015/5/15 14:16, Jan Beulich wrote:
On 15.05.15 at 04:57, tiejun.c...@intel.com wrote:
On 2015/4/20 21:51, Jan Beulich wrote:
On 10.04.15 at 11:22, tiejun.c...@intel.com wrote:
--- a/tools/libxl/libxl_dom.c
+++ b/tools/libxl/libxl_dom.c
@@ -787,6 +787,70 @@ out:
return rc;
}
On 2015/5/15 14:25, Jan Beulich wrote:
On 15.05.15 at 08:11, tiejun.c...@intel.com wrote:
On 2015/4/20 22:29, Jan Beulich wrote:
On 10.04.15 at 11:22, tiejun.c...@intel.com wrote:
@@ -119,10 +120,6 @@ int build_e820_table(struct e820entry *e820,
/* Low RAM goes here. Reserve space for
On 2015/5/15 14:35, Jan Beulich wrote:
On 15.05.15 at 08:24, tiejun.c...@intel.com wrote:
On 2015/5/15 14:12, Jan Beulich wrote:
On 15.05.15 at 04:33, tiejun.c...@intel.com wrote:
On 2015/4/20 21:46, Jan Beulich wrote:
On 10.04.15 at 11:22, tiejun.c...@intel.com wrote:
---
On 2015/5/15 14:12, Jan Beulich wrote:
On 15.05.15 at 04:33, tiejun.c...@intel.com wrote:
On 2015/4/20 21:46, Jan Beulich wrote:
On 10.04.15 at 11:22, tiejun.c...@intel.com wrote:
--- a/xen/arch/x86/hvm/hvm.c
+++ b/xen/arch/x86/hvm/hvm.c
@@ -4729,7 +4729,6 @@ static long hvm_memory_op(int
On 2015/5/15 15:44, Jan Beulich wrote:
On 15.05.15 at 09:34, tiejun.c...@intel.com wrote:
So I think we may need to adjust pci_mem_start like this,
@@ -301,6 +301,19 @@ void pci_setup(void)
pci_mem_start = 1;
}
+/* Relocate PCI memory that overlaps reserved space,
On 2015/5/15 16:12, Jan Beulich wrote:
On 15.05.15 at 10:00, tiejun.c...@intel.com wrote:
On 2015/5/15 15:34, Jan Beulich wrote:
On 15.05.15 at 09:11, tiejun.c...@intel.com wrote:
On 2015/5/15 14:56, Jan Beulich wrote:
On 15.05.15 at 08:39, tiejun.c...@intel.com wrote:
On 2015/5/15 14:25,
On 2015/5/15 14:19, Jan Beulich wrote:
On 15.05.15 at 05:18, tiejun.c...@intel.com wrote:
On 2015/4/20 22:21, Jan Beulich wrote:
On 10.04.15 at 11:22, tiejun.c...@intel.com wrote:
--- a/tools/firmware/hvmloader/pci.c
+++ b/tools/firmware/hvmloader/pci.c
@@ -59,8 +59,8 @@ void pci_setup(void)
On 2015/4/20 22:29, Jan Beulich wrote:
On 10.04.15 at 11:22, tiejun.c...@intel.com wrote:
--- a/tools/firmware/hvmloader/e820.c
+++ b/tools/firmware/hvmloader/e820.c
@@ -73,7 +73,8 @@ int build_e820_table(struct e820entry *e820,
unsigned int lowmem_reserved_base,
On 2015/5/15 15:32, Jan Beulich wrote:
On 15.05.15 at 09:09, tiejun.c...@intel.com wrote:
On 2015/5/15 14:16, Jan Beulich wrote:
On 15.05.15 at 04:57, tiejun.c...@intel.com wrote:
On 2015/4/20 21:51, Jan Beulich wrote:
On 10.04.15 at 11:22, tiejun.c...@intel.com wrote:
---
On 2015/5/15 16:54, Jan Beulich wrote:
On 15.05.15 at 10:47, tiejun.c...@intel.com wrote:
On 2015/5/15 16:12, Jan Beulich wrote:
On 15.05.15 at 10:00, tiejun.c...@intel.com wrote:
On 2015/5/15 15:34, Jan Beulich wrote:
On 15.05.15 at 09:11, tiejun.c...@intel.com wrote:
On 2015/5/15 14:56,
On 2015/4/20 21:46, Jan Beulich wrote:
On 10.04.15 at 11:22, tiejun.c...@intel.com wrote:
--- a/xen/arch/x86/hvm/hvm.c
+++ b/xen/arch/x86/hvm/hvm.c
@@ -4729,7 +4729,6 @@ static long hvm_memory_op(int cmd,
XEN_GUEST_HANDLE_PARAM(void) arg)
switch ( cmd MEMOP_CMD_MASK )
{
-
On 2015/5/11 18:53, Jan Beulich wrote:
On 11.05.15 at 11:45, tiejun.c...@intel.com wrote:
On 2015/4/20 21:39, Jan Beulich wrote:
On 10.04.15 at 11:21, tiejun.c...@intel.com wrote:
--- a/tools/libxc/xc_domain.c
+++ b/tools/libxc/xc_domain.c
@@ -1654,13 +1654,15 @@ int
On 2015/5/11 19:32, Wei Liu wrote:
On Mon, May 11, 2015 at 04:09:53PM +0800, Chen, Tiejun wrote:
On 2015/5/8 22:43, Wei Liu wrote:
Sorry for the late review. This series fell through the crack.
Thanks for your review.
On Fri, Apr 10, 2015 at 05:21:55PM +0800, Tiejun Chen wrote:
While
On 2015/4/20 21:51, Jan Beulich wrote:
On 10.04.15 at 11:22, tiejun.c...@intel.com wrote:
--- a/tools/libxl/libxl_dom.c
+++ b/tools/libxl/libxl_dom.c
@@ -787,6 +787,70 @@ out:
return rc;
}
+static int libxl__domain_construct_memmap(libxl_ctx *ctx,
+
On 2015/4/20 21:57, Jan Beulich wrote:
On 10.04.15 at 11:22, tiejun.c...@intel.com wrote:
--- a/tools/firmware/hvmloader/util.c
+++ b/tools/firmware/hvmloader/util.c
@@ -27,6 +27,16 @@
#include xen/memory.h
#include xen/sched.h
+int check_hole_conflict(uint64_t start, uint64_t size,
+
On 2015/4/20 22:21, Jan Beulich wrote:
On 10.04.15 at 11:22, tiejun.c...@intel.com wrote:
--- a/tools/firmware/hvmloader/pci.c
+++ b/tools/firmware/hvmloader/pci.c
@@ -59,8 +59,8 @@ void pci_setup(void)
uint32_t bar_reg;
uint64_t bar_sz;
} *bars = (struct bars
On 2015/5/11 17:51, Julien Grall wrote:
Hi,
On 11/05/15 09:42, Chen, Tiejun wrote:
diff --git a/xen/drivers/passthrough/arm/smmu.c
b/xen/drivers/passthrough/arm/smmu.c
index 8a9b58b..a3e6383 100644
--- a/xen/drivers/passthrough/arm/smmu.c
+++ b/xen/drivers/passthrough/arm/smmu.c
@@ -2599,7
On 2015/5/11 18:57, Jan Beulich wrote:
On 11.05.15 at 11:51, julien.gr...@citrix.com wrote:
Hi,
On 11/05/15 09:42, Chen, Tiejun wrote:
diff --git a/xen/drivers/passthrough/arm/smmu.c
b/xen/drivers/passthrough/arm/smmu.c
index 8a9b58b..a3e6383 100644
--- a/xen/drivers/passthrough/arm/smmu.c
On 2015/5/8 13:21, Michael Dexter wrote:
On 5/7/15 7:59 PM, Chen, Tiejun wrote:
Are you running IGD passthrough with guest OS?
Only as far as the PVH Xen kernel is passing through all hardware to
Dom0. Roger can elaborate as needed.
What is your CPU? BDW? HSW? And what is your FreeBSD Linux
On 2015/5/8 23:13, Wei Liu wrote:
On Fri, May 08, 2015 at 09:24:56AM +0800, Chen, Tiejun wrote:
Campbell, Jackson, Wei and Stefano,
Any consideration?
I can follow up Jan's idea but I need you guys make sure I'm going to do
this properly.
Look at my earlier reply.
Thanks for your reply
On 2015/5/8 22:43, Wei Liu wrote:
Sorry for the late review. This series fell through the crack.
Thanks for your review.
On Fri, Apr 10, 2015 at 05:21:55PM +0800, Tiejun Chen wrote:
While building a VM, HVM domain builder provides struct hvm_info_table{}
to help hvmloader. Currently it
On 2015/5/9 0:07, Julien Grall wrote:
Hi,
On 10/04/15 10:21, Tiejun Chen wrote:
diff --git a/xen/include/public/domctl.h b/xen/include/public/domctl.h
index ca0e51e..e5ba7cb 100644
--- a/xen/include/public/domctl.h
+++ b/xen/include/public/domctl.h
@@ -493,6 +493,10 @@
Sorry for this delay response.
On 2015/4/20 21:36, Jan Beulich wrote:
On 10.04.15 at 11:21, tiejun.c...@intel.com wrote:
--- a/xen/drivers/passthrough/vtd/iommu.c
+++ b/xen/drivers/passthrough/vtd/iommu.c
@@ -1793,8 +1793,14 @@ static void iommu_set_pgd(struct domain *d)
On 2015/4/20 21:39, Jan Beulich wrote:
On 10.04.15 at 11:21, tiejun.c...@intel.com wrote:
--- a/tools/libxc/xc_domain.c
+++ b/tools/libxc/xc_domain.c
@@ -1654,13 +1654,15 @@ int xc_domain_setdebugging(xc_interface *xch,
int xc_assign_device(
xc_interface *xch,
uint32_t domid,
-
On 2015/5/8 21:04, Wei Liu wrote:
Sorry for the late review.
Really thanks for taking your time :)
On Fri, Apr 10, 2015 at 05:21:52PM +0800, Tiejun Chen wrote:
This patch introduces user configurable parameters to specify RDM
resource and according policies,
Global RDM parameter:
rdm
On 2015/5/8 21:07, Wei Liu wrote:
On Fri, Apr 10, 2015 at 05:21:54PM +0800, Tiejun Chen wrote:
We will introduce the hypercall xc_reserved_device_memory_map
approach to libxc. This helps us get rdm entry info according to
different parameters. If flag == PCI_DEV_RDM_ALL, all entries
should be
Campbell, Jackson, Wei and Stefano,
Any consideration?
I can follow up Jan's idea but I need you guys make sure I'm going to do
this properly.
Thanks
Tiejun
On 2015/5/7 10:22, Chen, Tiejun wrote:
On 2015/5/6 23:34, Jan Beulich wrote:
On 06.05.15 at 17:00, tiejun.c...@intel.com wrote
On 2015/5/7 14:04, Jan Beulich wrote:
Chen, Tiejun tiejun.c...@intel.com 05/07/15 4:22 AM
On 2015/5/6 23:34, Jan Beulich wrote:
On 06.05.15 at 17:00, tiejun.c...@intel.com wrote:
On 2015/4/20 19:13, Jan Beulich wrote:
On 10.04.15 at 11:21, tiejun.c...@intel.com wrote
On 2015/5/8 2:58, Michael Dexter wrote:
Hello all,
Are you running IGD passthrough with guest OS?
On 5/6/15 7:47 PM, Chen, Tiejun wrote:
#1. Disable interrupt message generation
#2. Please add 'cpuidle=0 msi=1'
With another try, get the same with the patched kernel:
What is your CPU
On 2015/5/5 17:24, Jan Beulich wrote:
On 05.05.15 at 04:45, tiejun.c...@intel.com wrote:
Does this work for everyone?
Please first of all explain why the interfaces in asm/flushtlb.h can't
be used here (at least when flushing entire pages). Because - as
I also don't understand any reason we
On 2015/5/5 23:46, Boris Ostrovsky wrote:
On 05/04/2015 05:14 AM, Andrew Cooper wrote:
On 04/05/2015 09:52, Jan Beulich wrote:
On 04.05.15 at 04:16, tiejun.c...@intel.com wrote:
--- a/xen/drivers/passthrough/vtd/x86/vtd.c
+++ b/xen/drivers/passthrough/vtd/x86/vtd.c
@@ -56,7 +56,9 @@ unsigned
On 2015/5/6 15:12, Jan Beulich wrote:
On 05.05.15 at 18:11, boris.ostrov...@oracle.com wrote:
On 05/05/2015 11:58 AM, Jan Beulich wrote:
On 05.05.15 at 17:46, boris.ostrov...@oracle.com wrote:
On 05/04/2015 05:14 AM, Andrew Cooper wrote:
On 04/05/2015 09:52, Jan Beulich wrote:
On 04.05.15
On 2015/5/7 0:46, Michael Dexter wrote:
Hello all,
(Resend: I cropped out too much and have added 'pciconf -lv' output)
I have been working with Roger Pau Monne to bring FreeBSD Dom0 support
to a production-ready state but we appear to have hit an IOMMU issue.
Hardware: Lenovo ThinkPad T420
On 2015/5/6 23:34, Jan Beulich wrote:
On 06.05.15 at 17:00, tiejun.c...@intel.com wrote:
On 2015/4/20 19:13, Jan Beulich wrote:
On 10.04.15 at 11:21, tiejun.c...@intel.com wrote:
--- a/tools/libxc/xc_domain.c
+++ b/tools/libxc/xc_domain.c
@@ -1665,6 +1665,46 @@ int xc_assign_device(
On 2015/4/20 19:13, Jan Beulich wrote:
On 10.04.15 at 11:21, tiejun.c...@intel.com wrote:
--- a/tools/libxc/xc_domain.c
+++ b/tools/libxc/xc_domain.c
@@ -1665,6 +1665,46 @@ int xc_assign_device(
return do_domctl(xch, domctl);
}
+struct xen_reserved_device_memory
On 2015/5/5 14:02, Andrew Cooper wrote:
On 05/05/2015 05:46, Chen, Tiejun wrote:
A better approach might be:
printk(KERN_DEBUG APIC error on CPU%u: %02lx(%02lx), ...)
for ( i = (17); i; i = 1 )
if ( v1 i )
printk(, %s, apic_fault_reasons[i]);
I guess this should
On 2015/5/4 18:43, Jan Beulich wrote:
On 04.05.15 at 12:39, tiejun.c...@intel.com wrote:
On 2015/5/4 16:52, Jan Beulich wrote:
On 04.05.15 at 04:16, tiejun.c...@intel.com wrote:
--- a/xen/drivers/passthrough/vtd/x86/vtd.c
+++ b/xen/drivers/passthrough/vtd/x86/vtd.c
@@ -56,7 +56,9 @@ unsigned
On 2015/5/4 16:25, Andrew Cooper wrote:
On 04/05/2015 03:03, Tiejun Chen wrote:
Just make this readable while debug.
debugging
Fixed.
Signed-off-by: Tiejun Chen tiejun.c...@intel.com
In principle, I fully agree with the change. (I had an item on my todo
list to make a change like
On 2015/5/4 16:52, Jan Beulich wrote:
On 04.05.15 at 04:16, tiejun.c...@intel.com wrote:
--- a/xen/drivers/passthrough/vtd/x86/vtd.c
+++ b/xen/drivers/passthrough/vtd/x86/vtd.c
@@ -56,7 +56,9 @@ unsigned int get_cache_line_size(void)
void cacheline_flush(char * addr)
{
+mb();
On 2015/5/4 16:07, Jan Beulich wrote:
On 04.05.15 at 04:03, tiejun.c...@intel.com wrote:
--- a/xen/arch/x86/apic.c
+++ b/xen/arch/x86/apic.c
@@ -1319,28 +1319,37 @@ out: ;
* This interrupt should never happen with our APIC/SMP architecture
*/
+static const char *apic_fault_reasons[] =
On 2015/5/4 16:57, Jan Beulich wrote:
On 04.05.15 at 07:08, tiejun.c...@intel.com wrote:
At first I doubted this is issued by some improper cache behaviors.
Because as you see, root_entry[0] = 80f5001 indicates we already set
that present bit. But Caching Mode bit is zero in BDW so this means
On 2015/5/4 18:52, Tian, Kevin wrote:
From: Jan Beulich [mailto:jbeul...@suse.com]
Sent: Monday, May 04, 2015 6:44 PM
On 04.05.15 at 12:39, tiejun.c...@intel.com wrote:
On 2015/5/4 16:52, Jan Beulich wrote:
On 04.05.15 at 04:16, tiejun.c...@intel.com wrote:
---
Yang,
Thanks for your review.
On 2015/5/4 12:07, Zhang, Yang Z wrote:
Chen, Tiejun wrote on 2015-05-04:
While initializing VT-D we should mask interrupt message generation
to avoid receiving any interrupt as pending before enable DMA
translation, and also mask that before disable DMA engine
On 2015/4/23 20:59, Jan Beulich wrote:
On 23.04.15 at 14:32, tiejun.c...@intel.com wrote:
But if you already have one just please ignore this and tell me
Here's what I currently have:
Could you resend me this as an attached file? Then I can apply that
properly without any miss?
Thanks
On 2015/4/15 21:10, Ian Jackson wrote:
Tiejun Chen writes ([RFC][PATCH 04/13] tools/libxl: detect and avoid conflicts with
RDM):
While building a VM, HVM domain builder provides struct hvm_info_table{}
to help hvmloader. Currently it includes two fields to construct guest
e820 table by
On 2015/4/16 23:05, Tim Deegan wrote:
Hi,
At 17:21 +0800 on 10 Apr (1428686516), Tiejun Chen wrote:
@@ -862,6 +862,36 @@ int set_mmio_p2m_entry(struct domain *d, unsigned long
gfn, mfn_t mfn,
return set_typed_p2m_entry(d, gfn, mfn, p2m_mmio_direct, access);
}
+int
@@ -121,6 +121,8 @@ void iommu_dt_domain_destroy(struct domain *d);
struct page_info;
+typedef int iommu_grdm_t(xen_pfn_t start, xen_ulong_t nr, u32 id, void *ctxt);
This needs a comment describing what the return values are.
Will do.
I'm not sure if yourself determine providing
On 2015/4/16 23:40, Tim Deegan wrote:
Hi,
At 17:21 +0800 on 10 Apr (1428686518), Tiejun Chen wrote:
+/*
+ * In some cases, e.g. add a device to hwdomain, and remove a device from
+ * user domain, 'try' is fine enough since this is always safe to hwdomain.
+ */
+#define
On 2015/4/13 19:02, Wei Liu wrote:
On Mon, Apr 13, 2015 at 10:09:51AM +0800, Chen, Tiejun wrote:
[...]
Hardcoded value?
Yes. Actually, we intend to use this to present that lowmem entry,
tools/firmware/hvmloader/e820.c:
/* Low RAM goes here. Reserve space for special pages
Wei,
Thanks for your quick comment.
+static int libxl__domain_construct_memmap(libxl_ctx *ctx,
Internal function should take libxl__gc *gc.
Right.
+ libxl_domain_config *d_config,
+ uint32_t domid,
+
Perhaps add With qemu-xen-traditional IGD is always assumed and other
options than autodetect or explicit IGD will result in an error?
Will do.
diff --git a/tools/libxl/libxl_dm.c b/tools/libxl/libxl_dm.c
index a8b08f2..4fd6310 100644
--- a/tools/libxl/libxl_dm.c
+++
On 2015/3/30 17:19, Ian Campbell wrote:
On Mon, 2015-03-30 at 09:28 +0800, Chen, Tiejun wrote:
Sounds it should be a legacy fix to qemu-xen-tranditional :) So lets do
it now,
@@ -326,6 +326,10 @@ static char **
libxl__build_device_model_args_old(libxl__gc *gc
On 2015/3/27 17:54, Ian Campbell wrote:
On Fri, 2015-03-27 at 09:29 +0800, Chen, Tiejun wrote:
On 2015/3/26 18:06, Ian Campbell wrote:
On Thu, 2015-03-26 at 08:53 +0800, Chen, Tiejun wrote:
Hrm, OK. I suppose we can live with autodetect and igd both meaning igd
and whoever adds a new type
201 - 300 of 363 matches
Mail list logo
