On Thu, Nov 02, 2017 at 05:11:17PM +, Roger Pau Monné wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 02, 2017 at 07:02:49PM +0200, Pasi Kärkkäinen wrote:
> > On Thu, Aug 24, 2017 at 09:23:16AM +0100, Roger Pau Monné wrote:
> > > On Wed, Aug 23, 2017 at 07:13:00PM +0200, Andreas Kinzler wrote:
> > > > > > > From a brief
On Thu, Nov 02, 2017 at 07:02:49PM +0200, Pasi Kärkkäinen wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 24, 2017 at 09:23:16AM +0100, Roger Pau Monné wrote:
> > On Wed, Aug 23, 2017 at 07:13:00PM +0200, Andreas Kinzler wrote:
> > > > > > From a brief look it looks like this would be doable, but the way
> > > > > these flag
On Thu, Aug 24, 2017 at 09:23:16AM +0100, Roger Pau Monné wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 23, 2017 at 07:13:00PM +0200, Andreas Kinzler wrote:
> > > > > From a brief look it looks like this would be doable, but the way
> > > > these flags are being communicated is rather ugly (the values used
> > > > here
> >
On Wed, Aug 23, 2017 at 07:13:00PM +0200, Andreas Kinzler wrote:
> > > > From a brief look it looks like this would be doable, but the way
> > > these flags are being communicated is rather ugly (the values used
> > > here
> > > > aren't part of the public interface, and hence it wasn't immediately
> From a brief look it looks like this would be doable, but the way
these flags are being communicated is rather ugly (the values used here
> aren't part of the public interface, and hence it wasn't immediately
> clear whether using one of the unused bits would be an option, but
> it looks like
On Mon, Aug 21, 2017 at 04:18:56PM +0100, Roger Pau Monné wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 21, 2017 at 09:14:45AM -0600, Jan Beulich wrote:
> > >>> On 21.08.17 at 16:49, wrote:
> > > Another option is to (ab)use the msi.gflags field to add another flag
> > > in order to signal Xen whether the interrupt should
On Mon, Aug 21, 2017 at 09:14:45AM -0600, Jan Beulich wrote:
> >>> On 21.08.17 at 16:49, wrote:
> > Another option is to (ab)use the msi.gflags field to add another flag
> > in order to signal Xen whether the interrupt should be unmasked. This
> > is in line with what you suggest below.
>
> From
>>> On 21.08.17 at 16:49, wrote:
> Another option is to (ab)use the msi.gflags field to add another flag
> in order to signal Xen whether the interrupt should be unmasked. This
> is in line with what you suggest below.
From a brief look it looks like this would be doable, but the way these
flags
On Mon, Aug 21, 2017 at 06:22:05AM -0600, Jan Beulich wrote:
> >>> On 21.08.17 at 11:46, wrote:
> > Xen never detects the MSIX table entry unmask because it happens
> > before the MSIX is bound to the guest, so the Xen msixtbl handlers are
> > not aware of this memory region.
> >
> > The two poss
>>> On 21.08.17 at 14:32, wrote:
>> > - Make QEMU setup the vectors when the table entries are unmasked,
>>>even if MSIX is not enabled.
>>> - Provide an hypercall so QEMU can unmask MSIX vectors on behalf of
>>>the guest. This would be used to unmask the entries if MSIX is
>>>enable
- Make QEMU setup the vectors when the table entries are unmasked,
even if MSIX is not enabled.
- Provide an hypercall so QEMU can unmask MSIX vectors on behalf of
the guest. This would be used to unmask the entries if MSIX is
enabled with table entries already unmasked.
Neither sounds
>>> On 21.08.17 at 11:46, wrote:
> Xen never detects the MSIX table entry unmask because it happens
> before the MSIX is bound to the guest, so the Xen msixtbl handlers are
> not aware of this memory region.
>
> The two possible solutions I see to this are:
>
> - Make QEMU setup the vectors whe
On Mon, Aug 21, 2017 at 11:09:01AM +0200, Andreas Kinzler wrote:
> Hello Roger & Jan,
>
> > > > Could you please try the patch below and paste the output you get on
> > > > the Xen console?
> > > Output is in attached file. Does it help?
> > Yes, thanks. I'm quite sure the problem is that MSIX tab
On Thu, Aug 17, 2017 at 07:36:20PM +0200, Andreas Kinzler wrote:
> On Tue, 15 Aug 2017 11:55:10 +0200, Roger Pau Monné
> wrote:
> > Could you please try the patch below and paste the output you get on
> > the Xen console?
>
> Output is in attached file. Does it help?
Yes, thanks. I'm quite sure
>>> On 17.08.17 at 19:36, wrote:
> On Tue, 15 Aug 2017 11:55:10 +0200, Roger Pau Monné
> wrote:
>> Could you please try the patch below and paste the output you get on
>> the Xen console?
>
> Output is in attached file. Does it help?
For the moment I'll defer to Roger, as he wrote the debuggi
On Tue, 15 Aug 2017 11:55:10 +0200, Roger Pau Monné
wrote:
Could you please try the patch below and paste the output you get on
the Xen console?
Output is in attached file. Does it help?
Regards Andreas(XEN) MSIX ctrl write. Enabled: 0 Maskall: 0. Configured entries:
(XEN) MSIX ctrl write. E
On Tue, Aug 15, 2017 at 06:12:32AM -0600, Jan Beulich wrote:
> >>> On 15.08.17 at 13:00, wrote:
> > On Tue, Aug 15, 2017 at 10:55:10AM +0100, Roger Pau Monné wrote:
> >> On Mon, Aug 14, 2017 at 02:08:56PM +0200, Andreas Kinzler wrote:
> >> > On Mon, 14 Aug 2017 13:56:58 +0200, Roger Pau Monné
> >
>>> On 15.08.17 at 13:00, wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 15, 2017 at 10:55:10AM +0100, Roger Pau Monné wrote:
>> On Mon, Aug 14, 2017 at 02:08:56PM +0200, Andreas Kinzler wrote:
>> > On Mon, 14 Aug 2017 13:56:58 +0200, Roger Pau Monné
>> > wrote:
>> > > > > I defined XEN_PT_LOGGING_ENABLED in xen_pt.h as r
On Tue, Aug 15, 2017 at 10:55:10AM +0100, Roger Pau Monné wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 14, 2017 at 02:08:56PM +0200, Andreas Kinzler wrote:
> > On Mon, 14 Aug 2017 13:56:58 +0200, Roger Pau Monné
> > wrote:
> > > > > I defined XEN_PT_LOGGING_ENABLED in xen_pt.h as requested without the
> > > > > "hack" pa
On Mon, Aug 14, 2017 at 02:08:56PM +0200, Andreas Kinzler wrote:
> On Mon, 14 Aug 2017 13:56:58 +0200, Roger Pau Monné
> wrote:
> > > > I defined XEN_PT_LOGGING_ENABLED in xen_pt.h as requested without the
> > > > "hack" patch. Log is attached. Does it help?
> > > It tells me that there's nothing
On Mon, 14 Aug 2017 13:56:58 +0200, Roger Pau Monné
wrote:
> I defined XEN_PT_LOGGING_ENABLED in xen_pt.h as requested without the
> "hack" patch. Log is attached. Does it help?
It tells me that there's nothing unexpected on that side. As I think I
had indicated before, we really need to see bo
On Mon, Aug 14, 2017 at 05:44:00AM -0600, Jan Beulich wrote:
> >>> On 14.08.17 at 13:31, wrote:
> > On Mon, 31 Jul 2017 12:12:45 +0200, Jan Beulich wrote:
> > "Andreas Kinzler" 07/17/17 6:32 PM >>>
> > Jan, I still have access to the hardware so perhaps we can finally
> > solve
> >
>>> On 14.08.17 at 13:31, wrote:
> On Mon, 31 Jul 2017 12:12:45 +0200, Jan Beulich wrote:
> "Andreas Kinzler" 07/17/17 6:32 PM >>>
> Jan, I still have access to the hardware so perhaps we can finally
> solve
> this problem.
Feel free to go ahead; I'll be on vacation for th
On Mon, 31 Jul 2017 12:12:45 +0200, Jan Beulich wrote:
"Andreas Kinzler" 07/17/17 6:32 PM >>>
Jan, I still have access to the hardware so perhaps we can finally
solve
this problem.
Feel free to go ahead; I'll be on vacation for the next three weeks.
Perhaps we can shortcut debugging a bit
>>> "Andreas Kinzler" 07/17/17 6:32 PM >>>
>>> Jan, I still have access to the hardware so perhaps we can finally solve
>>> this problem.
>> Feel free to go ahead; I'll be on vacation for the next three weeks.
>
>Perhaps we can shortcut debugging a bit because I looked through the
>patches of Xe
Hi,
On Mon, Jul 17, 2017 at 06:32:42PM +0200, Andreas Kinzler wrote:
> Hello Jan, Pasi, all
>
> >>Jan, I still have access to the hardware so perhaps we can finally solve
> >>this problem.
> >Feel free to go ahead; I'll be on vacation for the next three weeks.
>
> Perhaps we can shortcut debuggi
Hello Jan, Pasi, all
Jan, I still have access to the hardware so perhaps we can finally solve
this problem.
Feel free to go ahead; I'll be on vacation for the next three weeks.
Perhaps we can shortcut debugging a bit because I looked through the
patches of XenServer 7.2 and found the attach
>>> On 10.07.17 at 18:56, wrote:
> Hello Jan, Pasi, all
>
>>> I noticed that PCI passthrough for an LSI SAS HBA 9211 did not longer work
> (at least under Windows) when using Xen 4.8.1.
>>> I then bisected through various released versions and finally I narrowed it
> down to
>>> 4.5.5 (with qem
On Fri, Jul 07, 2017 at 06:39:03PM +0200, Andreas Kinzler wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I noticed that PCI passthrough for an LSI SAS HBA 9211 did not longer work
> (at least under Windows) when using Xen 4.8.1.
> I then bisected through various released versions and finally I narrowed it
> down to
>
> 4
Hello,
I noticed that PCI passthrough for an LSI SAS HBA 9211 did not longer work (at
least under Windows) when using Xen 4.8.1.
I then bisected through various released versions and finally I narrowed it
down to
4.5.5 (with qemu from Xen 4.6.5) -> working
4.6.0-rc1 (with qemu from Xen 4.6.5)
30 matches
Mail list logo
