abellini
> ; George Dunlap ;
> Andrew Cooper ; Dario Faggioli
> ; Ian Jackson ; David
> Vrabel ; jbeul...@suse.com
> Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v2 2/3] xen: add hypercall option to
> temporarily pin a vcpu
>
> On 01/03/16 09:02, Juergen Gross wrote:
>> Some ha
Vrabel
; jbeul...@suse.com
Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v2 2/3] xen: add hypercall option to
temporarily pin a vcpu
On 01/03/16 09:02, Juergen Gross wrote:
> Some hardware (e.g. Dell studio 1555 laptops) require SMIs to be
> called on physical cpu 0 only. Linux drivers like dcdbas or i8k
On 02/03/16 17:03, Dario Faggioli wrote:
> On Wed, 2016-03-02 at 16:34 +0100, Juergen Gross wrote:
>> On 02/03/16 10:27, Dario Faggioli wrote:
>>>
>>> However, an xl flag is easier to add, easier to document and easier
>>> and
>>> more natural to find, from the point of view of an user that reall
On Wed, 2016-03-02 at 16:34 +0100, Juergen Gross wrote:
> On 02/03/16 10:27, Dario Faggioli wrote:
> >
> > However, an xl flag is easier to add, easier to document and easier
> > and
> > more natural to find, from the point of view of an user that really
> > needs it. And perhaps it could turn out
On 02/03/16 10:27, Dario Faggioli wrote:
> On Wed, 2016-03-02 at 08:14 +0100, Juergen Gross wrote:
>> On 01/03/16 16:52, George Dunlap wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> Also -- have you actually tested the "cpupool move while pinned"
>>> functionality to make sure it actually works? There's a weird bit
>>> in
On 02/03/16 12:49, Dario Faggioli wrote:
> On Wed, 2016-03-02 at 12:19 +0100, Juergen Gross wrote:
>> On 02/03/16 10:27, Dario Faggioli wrote:
>>>
>>> Yep. Should we also add an error message for the user to be able to
>>> see
>>> it, even if she can't read the comment in the source code? (Not
>>
On Wed, 2016-03-02 at 12:19 +0100, Juergen Gross wrote:
> On 02/03/16 10:27, Dario Faggioli wrote:
> >
> > Yep. Should we also add an error message for the user to be able to
> > see
> > it, even if she can't read the comment in the source code? (Not
> > necessarily right there, if that would make
On 02/03/16 10:27, Dario Faggioli wrote:
> On Wed, 2016-03-02 at 08:14 +0100, Juergen Gross wrote:
>> On 01/03/16 16:52, George Dunlap wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> Also -- have you actually tested the "cpupool move while pinned"
>>> functionality to make sure it actually works? There's a weird bit
>>> in
On Wed, 2016-03-02 at 08:14 +0100, Juergen Gross wrote:
> On 01/03/16 16:52, George Dunlap wrote:
> >
> >
> > Also -- have you actually tested the "cpupool move while pinned"
> > functionality to make sure it actually works? There's a weird bit
> > in
> > cpupool_unassign_cpu_helper() where afte
On 01/03/16 16:52, George Dunlap wrote:
> On 01/03/16 09:02, Juergen Gross wrote:
>> Some hardware (e.g. Dell studio 1555 laptops) require SMIs to be
>> called on physical cpu 0 only. Linux drivers like dcdbas or i8k try
>> to achieve this by pinning the running thread to cpu 0, but in Dom0
>> this
>>> On 01.03.16 at 16:55, wrote:
> On 01/03/16 15:52, George Dunlap wrote:
>> On 01/03/16 09:02, Juergen Gross wrote:
>>> --- a/xen/common/schedule.c
>>> +++ b/xen/common/schedule.c
>>> @@ -271,6 +271,12 @@ int sched_move_domain(struct domain *d, struct cpupool
>>> *c)
>>> struct scheduler *
On 01/03/16 15:52, George Dunlap wrote:
> On 01/03/16 09:02, Juergen Gross wrote:
>> Some hardware (e.g. Dell studio 1555 laptops) require SMIs to be
>> called on physical cpu 0 only. Linux drivers like dcdbas or i8k try
>> to achieve this by pinning the running thread to cpu 0, but in Dom0
>> this
On 01/03/16 09:02, Juergen Gross wrote:
> Some hardware (e.g. Dell studio 1555 laptops) require SMIs to be
> called on physical cpu 0 only. Linux drivers like dcdbas or i8k try
> to achieve this by pinning the running thread to cpu 0, but in Dom0
> this is not enough: the vcpu must be pinned to phy
On 01/03/16 12:15, Dario Faggioli wrote:
> On Tue, 2016-03-01 at 12:58 +0100, Juergen Gross wrote:
>> On 01/03/16 12:55, David Vrabel wrote:
>>>
>>> On 01/03/16 09:02, Juergen Gross wrote:
Some hardware (e.g. Dell studio 1555 laptops) require SMIs to be
called on physical cpu 0 only.
On Tue, 2016-03-01 at 12:58 +0100, Juergen Gross wrote:
> On 01/03/16 12:55, David Vrabel wrote:
> >
> > On 01/03/16 09:02, Juergen Gross wrote:
> > >
> > > Some hardware (e.g. Dell studio 1555 laptops) require SMIs to be
> > > called on physical cpu 0 only. Linux drivers like dcdbas or i8k
> > >
On 01/03/16 12:55, David Vrabel wrote:
> On 01/03/16 09:02, Juergen Gross wrote:
>> Some hardware (e.g. Dell studio 1555 laptops) require SMIs to be
>> called on physical cpu 0 only. Linux drivers like dcdbas or i8k try
>> to achieve this by pinning the running thread to cpu 0, but in Dom0
>> this
On 01/03/16 12:27, Jan Beulich wrote:
On 01.03.16 at 10:02, wrote:
>> @@ -752,14 +766,20 @@ static int vcpu_set_affinity(
>> struct vcpu *v, const cpumask_t *affinity, cpumask_t *which)
>> {
>> spinlock_t *lock;
>> +int ret = 0;
>>
>> lock = vcpu_schedule_lock_irq(v);
>>
On 01/03/16 09:02, Juergen Gross wrote:
> Some hardware (e.g. Dell studio 1555 laptops) require SMIs to be
> called on physical cpu 0 only. Linux drivers like dcdbas or i8k try
> to achieve this by pinning the running thread to cpu 0, but in Dom0
> this is not enough: the vcpu must be pinned to phy
>>> On 01.03.16 at 10:02, wrote:
> @@ -752,14 +766,20 @@ static int vcpu_set_affinity(
> struct vcpu *v, const cpumask_t *affinity, cpumask_t *which)
> {
> spinlock_t *lock;
> +int ret = 0;
>
> lock = vcpu_schedule_lock_irq(v);
>
> -cpumask_copy(which, affinity);
> +
Some hardware (e.g. Dell studio 1555 laptops) require SMIs to be
called on physical cpu 0 only. Linux drivers like dcdbas or i8k try
to achieve this by pinning the running thread to cpu 0, but in Dom0
this is not enough: the vcpu must be pinned to physical cpu 0 via
Xen, too.
Add a stable hypercal
20 matches
Mail list logo
