RE: [Xen-devel] Re: [PATCH 0/5] Add MSI support to xen environment

["Jiang, Yunhong" <yunhong.jiang@xxxxxxxxx>]

I update the description of the patch, and add signed-off-by line.
the sequence is :
For xen tree: pirq_per_domain.patch -- msi_irq_xen.patch --
msi_passthrough.patch -- msix-permission.patch
For kernel tree: msi_kernel.patch -- msi_disable.patch
Please review the patches.

Thanks
Yunhong Jiang

Keir Fraser <mailto:Keir.Fraser@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> The patches need a signed-off-by line.
> 
> -- Keir
> 
> On 1/11/07 09:33, "Jiang, Yunhong" <yunhong.jiang@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> 
>> Keir, attached is the updated patchset.
>> 
>> A xen option "msi_irq_enable" is added. the pirq_domain method will
be
>> enabled only when msi_irq_enable=1.
>> 
>> pirq_per_domain.patch is the changes for per domain pirq. When
>> msi_irq_enable=0, it in fact still use old method.
>> msi_irq_xen.patch changes xen for MSI  support. Currently we are
using
>> ACK_NEW method to avoid possible interrupt storm in some device.
>> msi_passthrough.patch add MSI support to VT-d domain.
>> msix-permission.patch is to disable MSI-x MMIO permission for domain
U.
>> 
>> msi_kernel.patch add MSI/MSI-X support to domain0/domainU.
>> msi_disable.patch changes the configuration file. current settting is
to
>> disable MSI by default. 
>> 
>> -- Yunhong Jiang
>> 
>> Keir Fraser <mailto:Keir.Fraser@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>> Er, maybe. Does this slot in with some of the other patches
>>> you previously
>>> sent? Are we shooting to get this into 3.2.0 (scary!)?
>>> 
>>> -- Keir
>>> 
>>> On 30/10/07 14:27, "Jiang, Yunhong" <yunhong.jiang@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>> 
>>>> So, Keir, how about the attached method for the per-domain pirq?
>>>> Now there is no need to change domain0 any more. Also domain U
can't do
>>>> the map. I verified current domain0/domU works on it.
>>>> But it still changes the control panel and hope that is acceptable.
>>>> 
>>>> Thanks
>>>> Yunhong Jiang
>>>> 
>>>> xen-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx <> wrote:
>>>>> On 26/10/07 16:02, "Jiang, Yunhong"
> <yunhong.jiang@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>>>> dom0 needs to be involved, since we can't let domU map any
arbitrary
>>>>>>> vector into its pirq space. Since dom0 has to be involved in
access
>>>>>>> control to the irq vector space, can't it do the mapping?
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> yes, what I mean is, "before starting the domain" works for
IOAPIC IRQ,
>>>>>> not MSI. MSI will still through communcation between PCI
>>>>>> frontend/backend directly.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Oh, I see. Then it probably has to be a phydevop and let dom0
kernel do
>>>>> it. But there should be no reason to let domU use the map_irq
>>>>> physdev_op at all. 
>>>>> 
>>>>> -- Keir
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> Xen-devel mailing list
>>>>> Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>>>> http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel

Attachment: MSI_disable.patch
Description: MSI_disable.patch

Attachment: msi_irq_xen.patch
Description: msi_irq_xen.patch

Attachment: msi_kernel.patch
Description: msi_kernel.patch

Attachment: msi_passthrough.patch
Description: msi_passthrough.patch

Attachment: msix-permission.patch
Description: msix-permission.patch

Attachment: pirq_per_domain.patch
Description: pirq_per_domain.patch

_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel