Wednesday, November 19, 2014, 4:04:59 PM, you wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 19, 2014 at 12:16:44PM +0100, Sander Eikelenboom wrote:
>>
>> Wednesday, November 19, 2014, 2:55:41 AM, you wrote:
>>
>> > On Tue, Nov 18, 2014 at 11:12:54PM +0100, Sander Eikelenboom wrote:
>> >>
>> >> Tuesday, November 18, 20
On Wed, Nov 19, 2014 at 12:16:44PM +0100, Sander Eikelenboom wrote:
>
> Wednesday, November 19, 2014, 2:55:41 AM, you wrote:
>
> > On Tue, Nov 18, 2014 at 11:12:54PM +0100, Sander Eikelenboom wrote:
> >>
> >> Tuesday, November 18, 2014, 9:56:33 PM, you wrote:
> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> Uhmm i though
Wednesday, November 19, 2014, 2:55:41 AM, you wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 18, 2014 at 11:12:54PM +0100, Sander Eikelenboom wrote:
>>
>> Tuesday, November 18, 2014, 9:56:33 PM, you wrote:
>>
>> >>
>> >> Uhmm i thought i had these switched off (due to problems earlier and then
>> >> forgot
>> >> abou
On Tue, Nov 18, 2014 at 11:12:54PM +0100, Sander Eikelenboom wrote:
>
> Tuesday, November 18, 2014, 9:56:33 PM, you wrote:
>
> >>
> >> Uhmm i thought i had these switched off (due to problems earlier and then
> >> forgot
> >> about them .. however looking at the earlier reports these lines wer
>
> Uhmm i thought i had these switched off (due to problems earlier and then
> forgot
> about them .. however looking at the earlier reports these lines were also in
> those reports).
>
> The xen-syms and these last runs are all with a prestine xen tree cloned
> today (staging
> branch), so
On Tue, Nov 18, 2014 at 05:20:44PM +, Jan Beulich wrote:
> >>> On 18.11.14 at 18:03, wrote:
> > Tuesday, November 18, 2014, 5:16:50 PM, you wrote:
> >> 1) test_and_[set|clear]_bit sometimes return unexpected values.
> >> [But this might be invalid as the addition of the 8303faaf25a8
>
>>> On 18.11.14 at 18:03, wrote:
> Tuesday, November 18, 2014, 5:16:50 PM, you wrote:
>> 1) test_and_[set|clear]_bit sometimes return unexpected values.
>> [But this might be invalid as the addition of the 8303faaf25a8
>> might be correct - as the second dpci the softirq is processin
Tuesday, November 18, 2014, 5:16:50 PM, you wrote:
>> Without #define DIFF_LIST 1:
>> 1) The guest still crashes (xl-dmesg-not-defined.txt)
> AHA!
> --MARK--
> 0: 8305085ffd28 [p:83054ef27e88, n:83054ef27e88]
> 1: 8305085ffd28 [p:0200200200200200, n:0100100100100100]
> The
> Without #define DIFF_LIST 1:
> 1) The guest still crashes (xl-dmesg-not-defined.txt)
AHA!
--MARK--
0: 8305085ffd28 [p:83054ef27e88, n:83054ef27e88]
1: 8305085ffd28 [p:0200200200200200, n:0100100100100100]
The same pirq_dpci structure is put twice on the list. That
will sur
Tuesday, November 18, 2014, 4:09:25 PM, you wrote:
> Tuesday, November 18, 2014, 12:07:41 PM, you wrote:
>> Tuesday, November 18, 2014, 3:49:27 AM, you wrote:
>>> On Mon, Nov 17, 2014 at 11:40:11PM +0100, Sander Eikelenboom wrote:
Monday, November 17, 2014, 9:43:47 PM, you wrote:
Tuesday, November 18, 2014, 3:49:27 AM, you wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 17, 2014 at 11:40:11PM +0100, Sander Eikelenboom wrote:
>>
>> Monday, November 17, 2014, 9:43:47 PM, you wrote:
>>
>> > . snip..
>> >> > # cat /proc/interrupts |grep eth
>> >> > 36: 384183 0 xen-pirq-ioapic-level e
>>> On 17.11.14 at 19:01, wrote:
> (XEN) [2014-11-17 17:54:18.695] CPU00:
> (XEN) [2014-11-17 17:54:18.705] CPU01:
> (XEN) [2014-11-17 17:54:18.716] d16 OK-softirq 62msec ago, state:1, 2628
> count,
> [prev:83054ef57e70, next:83054ef57e70] 83051b904428
> MAPPED_SHIFT GUEST_MSI_SHIFT
>>> On 17.11.14 at 23:40, wrote:
> OK, i still don't get why the output of debug-key 'i' reports +47 as pirq
> here instead of the guest value
> (g_gsi of for this legacy interrupt which is 40 ?), like it does when it's a
> MSI with the PIRQ ?
No - as you said yourself, it's a matter of who us
Monday, November 17, 2014, 9:43:47 PM, you wrote:
> . snip..
>> > # cat /proc/interrupts |grep eth
>> > 36: 384183 0 xen-pirq-ioapic-level eth0
>> > 63: 1 0 xen-pirq-msi-x eth1
>> > 64: 24 661961 xen-pirq-msi-x eth1-rx-0
>> > 65:2
. snip..
> > # cat /proc/interrupts |grep eth
> > 36: 384183 0 xen-pirq-ioapic-level eth0
> > 63: 1 0 xen-pirq-msi-x eth1
> > 64: 24 661961 xen-pirq-msi-x eth1-rx-0
> > 65:205 0 xen-pirq-msi-x eth1-rx-1
> > 66:
Monday, November 17, 2014, 5:34:16 PM, you wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 14, 2014 at 11:09:58PM +0100, Sander Eikelenboom wrote:
>>
>> Friday, November 14, 2014, 9:25:13 PM, you wrote:
>>
>> > On Fri, Nov 14, 2014 at 05:59:23PM +0100, Sander Eikelenboom wrote:
>> >>
>> >> Friday, November 14, 2014, 4:4
Monday, November 17, 2014, 5:34:16 PM, you wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 14, 2014 at 11:09:58PM +0100, Sander Eikelenboom wrote:
>>
>> Friday, November 14, 2014, 9:25:13 PM, you wrote:
>>
>> > On Fri, Nov 14, 2014 at 05:59:23PM +0100, Sander Eikelenboom wrote:
>> >>
>> >> Friday, November 14, 2014, 4:4
On Fri, Nov 14, 2014 at 11:09:58PM +0100, Sander Eikelenboom wrote:
>
> Friday, November 14, 2014, 9:25:13 PM, you wrote:
>
> > On Fri, Nov 14, 2014 at 05:59:23PM +0100, Sander Eikelenboom wrote:
> >>
> >> Friday, November 14, 2014, 4:43:58 PM, you wrote:
> >>
> >> On 14.11.14 at 16:20, w
Friday, November 14, 2014, 9:25:13 PM, you wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 14, 2014 at 05:59:23PM +0100, Sander Eikelenboom wrote:
>>
>> Friday, November 14, 2014, 4:43:58 PM, you wrote:
>>
>> On 14.11.14 at 16:20, wrote:
>> >> If it still helps i could try Andrews suggestion and try out with only
On Fri, Nov 14, 2014 at 05:59:23PM +0100, Sander Eikelenboom wrote:
>
> Friday, November 14, 2014, 4:43:58 PM, you wrote:
>
> On 14.11.14 at 16:20, wrote:
> >> If it still helps i could try Andrews suggestion and try out with only
> >> commit aeeea485 ..
>
> > Yes, even if it's pretty cer
Friday, November 14, 2014, 6:05:28 PM, you wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 14, 2014 at 05:59:23PM +0100, Sander Eikelenboom wrote:
>>
>> Friday, November 14, 2014, 4:43:58 PM, you wrote:
>>
>> On 14.11.14 at 16:20, wrote:
>> >> If it still helps i could try Andrews suggestion and try out with only
On Fri, Nov 14, 2014 at 05:59:23PM +0100, Sander Eikelenboom wrote:
>
> Friday, November 14, 2014, 4:43:58 PM, you wrote:
>
> On 14.11.14 at 16:20, wrote:
> >> If it still helps i could try Andrews suggestion and try out with only
> >> commit aeeea485 ..
>
> > Yes, even if it's pretty cer
Friday, November 14, 2014, 4:43:58 PM, you wrote:
On 14.11.14 at 16:20, wrote:
>> If it still helps i could try Andrews suggestion and try out with only
>> commit aeeea485 ..
> Yes, even if it's pretty certain it's the second of the commits, verifying
> this would be helpful (or if the as
>>> On 14.11.14 at 16:20, wrote:
> If it still helps i could try Andrews suggestion and try out with only
> commit aeeea485 ..
Yes, even if it's pretty certain it's the second of the commits, verifying
this would be helpful (or if the assumption is wrong, the pattern it's
dying with would change
Friday, November 14, 2014, 4:09:53 PM, you wrote:
On 14.11.14 at 15:34, wrote:
>> # addr2line -e ./xen-syms 82d080148f14
>> /usr/src/new/xen-unstable/xen/include/xen/list.h:175
>>
>> Which turns out to be this assert:
>> /**
>> * list_del - deletes entry from list.
>> * @entry: the e
>>> On 14.11.14 at 15:34, wrote:
> # addr2line -e ./xen-syms 82d080148f14
> /usr/src/new/xen-unstable/xen/include/xen/list.h:175
>
> Which turns out to be this assert:
> /**
> * list_del - deletes entry from list.
> * @entry: the element to delete from the list.
> * Note: list_empty on ent
Friday, November 14, 2014, 2:57:38 PM, you wrote:
On 14.11.14 at 14:11, wrote:
>> (XEN) [2014-11-14 13:00:06.810] [ Xen-4.5.0-rc x86_64 debug=y Not
>> tainted ]
>> (XEN) [2014-11-14 13:00:06.810] CPU:3
>> (XEN) [2014-11-14 13:00:06.810] RIP:e008:[]
>> dpci_softirq+0x9c/
>>> On 14.11.14 at 14:11, wrote:
> (XEN) [2014-11-14 13:00:06.810] [ Xen-4.5.0-rc x86_64 debug=y Not
> tainted ]
> (XEN) [2014-11-14 13:00:06.810] CPU:3
> (XEN) [2014-11-14 13:00:06.810] RIP:e008:[]
> dpci_softirq+0x9c/0x231
> (XEN) [2014-11-14 13:00:06.810] RFLAGS: 00
On 14/11/14 13:32, Andrew Cooper wrote:
> On 14/11/14 13:11, Sander Eikelenboom wrote:
>> Hi Konrad / Jan,
>>
>> One of these commits:
>> - aeeea485bcfe2a517ed9bcb3ba1c3be0f6824e07 dpci: move from an hvm_irq_dpci
>> (and struct domain) to an hvm_dirq_dpci model
>> - f6dd295381f4b6a66acddacf46bca89
On 14/11/14 13:11, Sander Eikelenboom wrote:
> Hi Konrad / Jan,
>
> One of these commits:
> - aeeea485bcfe2a517ed9bcb3ba1c3be0f6824e07 dpci: move from an hvm_irq_dpci
> (and struct domain) to an hvm_dirq_dpci model
> - f6dd295381f4b6a66acddacf46bca8940586c8d8 pci: replace tasklet with softirq
>
>
Hi Konrad / Jan,
One of these commits:
- aeeea485bcfe2a517ed9bcb3ba1c3be0f6824e07 dpci: move from an hvm_irq_dpci (and
struct domain) to an hvm_dirq_dpci model
- f6dd295381f4b6a66acddacf46bca8940586c8d8 pci: replace tasklet with softirq
gives (running under 5 minutes of host boot, on AMD hardwar
31 matches
Mail list logo
