On Thu, Mar 3, 2016 at 6:36 AM, Daniel Pocock <dan...@pocock.pro> wrote:
> > > On 03/03/16 13:15, Alex Williamson wrote: > > On Thu, Mar 3, 2016 at 5:33 AM, Daniel Pocock <dan...@pocock.pro > > <mailto:dan...@pocock.pro>> wrote: > > > > > > > > After the problems with the Intel 55x0 chipset, I've been looking at > how > > to choose something that is more likely to work > > > > I came across some lists maintained in various places: > > > > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_IOMMU-supporting_hardware > > (mentions the C612 chipset but not the earlier C602?) > > > > > https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1LnGpTrXalwGVNy0PWJDURhyxa3sgqkGXmvNCIvIMenk/edit?pref=2&pli=1#gid=0 > > > > http://support.citrix.com/article/CTX131385 > > (this says HP Z800 is supported, but maybe they were testing one with > > the newer 5520 C2 chipset) > > > > > https://www.vmware.com/resources/compatibility/search.php?deviceCategory=io > > > > http://www.odin.com/support/extreme/ > > (mentions a few chipsets) > > > > Are there any others that people consider useful for KVM VGA > > passthrough? > > > > > > http://vfio.blogspot.com/2015/10/intel-processors-with-acs-support.html > > > > VT-d is more in the processor than the chipset these days. Picking the > > right processor will automatically pick the right chipset, which will be > > X79/X99 (or equivalent C-series) based. > > > > > Thanks for this feedback > > X79 is Patsburg, appears to be equivalent[1] to C602 (HP Z420, Z620, Z820) > > X99 is Wellsburg, appears to be equivalent[2] to C612 (HP Z440, Z640, Z840) > > Your blog comments on the features moving from chipset to CPU. Does > that mean that BIOS and motherboard manufacturer have less impact on > success as well, or these are still strong factors? > > Is there anything you would consider to be a compelling reason to use > Wellsburg-based chipsets, or if I locate a box from the Patsburg era > that should suffice? > I suspect that since we've gotten past vendors actually providing an option to enable VT-d, there's very little they can do to screw it up, other than place RMRR requirements on devices (which is generally not a problem if you don't have an HP iLO). I have a Z820 that works just fine for device assignment and I test it regularly with Quadro VMs. I also have an X58 (Tylersburg ~5520) which is subject to the interrupt remapping issue and it also works just fine, so long as you opt-in to the isolation risks associated with lack of interrupt remapping. I don't know of any feature that you'll see specifically related to VT-d in Patsburg vs Wellsburg, both have quirks for exposing ACS-equivalent isolation in the PCH root ports, though Wellsburg came later (v4.0) and therefore might need a newer kernel than Patsburg (v3.16). Thanks, Alex
_______________________________________________ vfio-users mailing list vfio-users@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/vfio-users
