[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] Re: [Xen-devel] Issues with PCI-Passtrough (VT-d) in HVM with Xen 4.6
>>> On 06.06.16 at 11:09, <juwalter@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > [ 1466.964895 < 0.000023>] xen-pciback: 0000:06:00.0: write request 4 > bytes at 0xc = 4000 > [ 1466.964897 < 0.000002>] xen-pciback: 0000:06:00.0: read 1 bytes at > 0xc > [ 1466.964907 < 0.000010>] xen-pciback: 0000:06:00.0: read 1 bytes at > 0xc = 0 > [ 1466.964914 < 0.000007>] xen-pciback: 0000:06:00.0: read 1 bytes at > 0xf > [ 1466.964925 < 0.000011>] xen-pciback: 0000:06:00.0: read 1 bytes at > 0xf = 0 No read of 0xd and 0xe? > I agree that it is very ugly to reset the device behind the back of > pciback. > However, this is how the vendor decided to do it, and have no better > idea how > to accomplish this. > While I cannot image that there is, but can you think think of > any "correct" way to reset a pci device from > a) inside a DomU > b) from the user space library? No, resetting a device shouldn't be needed at all _after_ assignment to a guest. Do you have any insight why that's needed here in the first place? >> And actually the latency timer would, as a side effect of enabling >> bus mastering on the device (via the pci_set_master() call from >> command_write()) set the Latency Timer field properly, just that >> again pciback (and the rest of Dom0's PCI subsystem) thinks that >> bus mastering is already enabled on the device. So perhaps in >> permissive mode we should simply allow the latency timer field to >> be written, just like we allow writing various of the Command >> Register bits in that mode. Maintainers, what do you think? > (is that something that /sys/bus/pci/drivers/pciback/quirks could > help with? according to docs, this is only used/in effect when > in permissive mode) I don't think so - quirks can, afaict, only be registered for fields that don't have explicit handling associated to them (see the xen_pcibk_field_is_dup() call in xen_pcibk_config_add_field_offset()). >> If we decide to go that route, I would then wonder whether >> Cache Line Size being unconditionally writable right now would >> also better be restricted to permissive mode. > >> In any event, Jürgen, it would be helpful if you could confirm > If I understood you correctly, I modify xen_pcibk_config_write > in "drivers/xen/xen-pciback/conf_space.c" to specifically allow only > this field (latency timer) to be written and log everything. Right - just limit your existing workaround to just this one field. Jan _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
|
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |