Re: [PATCH 0/11] RFC: PCI using capabilitities

2011-12-11 Thread Sasha Levin
On Sun, 2011-12-11 at 14:47 +0200, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > First, I'd like to answer your questions from the PCI side. > Look for PCI rules in the PCI spec. > You will notices that a write is required to be able to > pass a read request. It might also pass read completion. > A read request will

Re: [PATCH 0/11] RFC: PCI using capabilitities

2011-12-11 Thread Sasha Levin
On Sun, 2011-12-11 at 14:30 +0200, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > On Sun, Dec 11, 2011 at 12:03:52PM +0200, Sasha Levin wrote: > > On Sun, 2011-12-11 at 11:05 +0200, Avi Kivity wrote: > > > mmios are strictly ordered. > > > > > > Perhaps your printfs are reordered by buffering? Are they from > > > d

Re: [PATCH 0/11] RFC: PCI using capabilitities

2011-12-11 Thread Michael S. Tsirkin
On Thu, Dec 08, 2011 at 05:37:37PM +0200, Sasha Levin wrote: > On Thu, 2011-12-08 at 20:52 +1030, Rusty Russell wrote: > > Here's the patch series I ended up with. I haven't coded up the QEMU > > side yet, so no idea if the new driver works. > > > > Questions: > > (1) Do we win from separating IS

Re: [PATCH 0/11] RFC: PCI using capabilitities

2011-12-11 Thread Michael S. Tsirkin
On Sun, Dec 11, 2011 at 12:03:52PM +0200, Sasha Levin wrote: > On Sun, 2011-12-11 at 11:05 +0200, Avi Kivity wrote: > > mmios are strictly ordered. > > > > Perhaps your printfs are reordered by buffering? Are they from > > different threads? Are you using coalesced mmio (which is still > > stric

Re: [PATCH 0/11] RFC: PCI using capabilitities

2011-12-11 Thread Sasha Levin
On Sun, 2011-12-11 at 11:05 +0200, Avi Kivity wrote: > mmios are strictly ordered. > > Perhaps your printfs are reordered by buffering? Are they from > different threads? Are you using coalesced mmio (which is still > strictly ordered, if used correctly)? I print the queue_selector and queue_a

Re: [PATCH 0/11] RFC: PCI using capabilitities

2011-12-11 Thread Avi Kivity
On 12/08/2011 05:37 PM, Sasha Levin wrote: > On Thu, 2011-12-08 at 20:52 +1030, Rusty Russell wrote: > > Here's the patch series I ended up with. I haven't coded up the QEMU > > side yet, so no idea if the new driver works. > > > > Questions: > > (1) Do we win from separating ISR, NOTIFY and COMM

Re: [PATCH 0/11] RFC: PCI using capabilitities

2011-12-10 Thread Sasha Levin
On Fri, 2011-12-09 at 16:47 +1030, Rusty Russell wrote: > On Thu, 08 Dec 2011 17:37:37 +0200, Sasha Levin > wrote: > > Which leads me to the question: Are MMIO vs MMIO reads/writes not > > ordered? > > That seems really odd, especially being repeatable. Happens every single time. Can't be a coi

Re: [PATCH 0/11] RFC: PCI using capabilitities

2011-12-09 Thread Rusty Russell
On Thu, 08 Dec 2011 17:37:37 +0200, Sasha Levin wrote: > Which leads me to the question: Are MMIO vs MMIO reads/writes not > ordered? That seems really odd, especially being repeatable. BTW, that's an address, not a pfn now. Cheers, Rusty. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubs

Re: [PATCH 0/11] RFC: PCI using capabilitities

2011-12-08 Thread Sasha Levin
On Thu, 2011-12-08 at 20:52 +1030, Rusty Russell wrote: > Here's the patch series I ended up with. I haven't coded up the QEMU > side yet, so no idea if the new driver works. > > Questions: > (1) Do we win from separating ISR, NOTIFY and COMMON? > (2) I used a "u8 bar"; should I use a bir and pac

Re: [PATCH 0/11] RFC: PCI using capabilitities

2011-12-08 Thread Sasha Levin
Rusty, I can't find the actual patches, could you verify that they were indeed sent? On Thu, 2011-12-08 at 20:52 +1030, Rusty Russell wrote: > Here's the patch series I ended up with. I haven't coded up the QEMU > side yet, so no idea if the new driver works. > > Questions: > (1) Do we win from