Re: [Xen-users] pvusb patch 3.9.4 (jacek burghardt)

["Nacho Alegre Alvarez" <nacho@xxxxxxxxx>]

Dear jacek burghardt

Follow you can find url for pvusb driver patch you can apply to 3.9.4 kernel:

http://members.iinet.net.au/~nathanael/0001-pvusb-driver.linux-next.patch

Un Saludo/Best Regards.

Nacho Alegre
e-mail: nacho@xxxxxxxxx

> Send Xen-users mailing list submissions to
>       xen-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
>       http://lists.xen.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-users
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
>       xen-users-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
>       xen-users-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of Xen-users digest..."
>
>
> Today's Topics:
>
>    1. pvusb patch 3.9.4 (jacek burghardt)
>    2. USB Audio Passthrough (Gordan Bobic)
>    3. Re: USB Audio Passthrough (Arjen)
>    4. Re: USB Audio Passthrough (Gordan Bobic)
>    5. XCP 1.6 mdadm (Frank@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx)
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Sat, 1 Jun 2013 06:33:13 -0600
> From: jacek burghardt <jaceksburghardt@xxxxxxxxx>
> To: xen-users <xen-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Subject: [Xen-users] pvusb patch 3.9.4
> Message-ID:
>       <CAHyyzzRPyLtT13XKDEpLcsK3tzk5cBYAh_Sj1Anf+rUePOMb4g@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
>
> Can someone share pvusb patch for 3.9.4 please
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL:
> <http://lists.xen.org/archives/html/xen-users/attachments/20130601/f1ed71a3/attachment.html>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 2
> Date: Sun, 02 Jun 2013 10:06:20 +0100
> From: Gordan Bobic <gordan@xxxxxxxxxx>
> To: xen-users <xen-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Subject: [Xen-users] USB Audio Passthrough
> Message-ID: <51AB0B0C.60806@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
>
> Hi,
>
> I'd like to ask if anyone managed to get USB audio passthrough working?
> In order to minimize PCI passthrough usage (I get audio dropouts on PCI
> audio passthrough (Intel ICH audio) lasting 10-30 seconds every few
> minutes), I got a generic USB audio adapter. It works fine on bare metal
> but in domU all I get is loud crackling noise instead of sound.
>
> Could this be related to Xen USB passthrough being limited to USB 1.1
> and the USB audio possibly requiring more bandwidth than that?
>
> Has anyone got USB audio passthrough working successfully and reliably?
> What USB sound module did you use?
>
> Gordan
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 3
> Date: Sun, 02 Jun 2013 11:29:32 +0200
> From: Arjen <arjenvanweelden@xxxxxxxxx>
> To: gordan@xxxxxxxxxx
> Cc: xen-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: Re: [Xen-users] USB Audio Passthrough
> Message-ID: <51AB107C.2020508@xxxxxxxxx>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
>
> On 02-06-13 11:06, Gordan Bobic wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> I'd like to ask if anyone managed to get USB audio passthrough working?
>> In order to minimize PCI passthrough usage (I get audio dropouts on PCI
>> audio passthrough (Intel ICH audio) lasting 10-30 seconds every few
>> minutes), I got a generic USB audio adapter. It works fine on bare metal
>> but in domU all I get is loud crackling noise instead of sound.
>>
>> Could this be related to Xen USB passthrough being limited to USB 1.1
>> and the USB audio possibly requiring more bandwidth than that?
>>
>> Has anyone got USB audio passthrough working successfully and reliably?
>> What USB sound module did you use?
>>
>> Gordan
>>
> Hi,
>
> I worked around a possibly similar problem with built-in Intel HD audio
> by initializing it on the dom0 (instead of hiding it) before doing the
> PCI passthrough.
>
> Also got some helpful advice over USB audio before, see thread:
> http://lists.xen.org/archives/html/xen-users/2013-05/msg00166.html
>
> I'm sorry that I cannot give you more specific help, as I have no
> experience with USB audio myself.
>
> Arjen
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 4
> Date: Sun, 02 Jun 2013 11:10:12 +0100
> From: Gordan Bobic <gordan@xxxxxxxxxx>
> To: "xen-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxx" <xen-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Subject: Re: [Xen-users] USB Audio Passthrough
> Message-ID: <51AB1A04.9020203@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
>
> On 06/02/2013 10:29 AM, Arjen wrote:
>> On 02-06-13 11:06, Gordan Bobic wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> I'd like to ask if anyone managed to get USB audio passthrough working?
>>> In order to minimize PCI passthrough usage (I get audio dropouts on PCI
>>> audio passthrough (Intel ICH audio) lasting 10-30 seconds every few
>>> minutes), I got a generic USB audio adapter. It works fine on bare
>>> metal
>>> but in domU all I get is loud crackling noise instead of sound.
>>>
>>> Could this be related to Xen USB passthrough being limited to USB 1.1
>>> and the USB audio possibly requiring more bandwidth than that?
>>>
>>> Has anyone got USB audio passthrough working successfully and reliably?
>>> What USB sound module did you use?
>>
>> I worked around a possibly similar problem with built-in Intel HD audio
>> by initializing it on the dom0 (instead of hiding it) before doing the
>> PCI passthrough.
>
> The odd thing is that it works fine initially, then at random intervals
> every few minutes it will drop out completely and go silent, before
> returning and continuing to work fine. If it was an initialization issue
> I would have expected it to not work to begin with (or at all).
>
>
>
>> Also got some helpful advice over USB audio before, see thread:
>> http://lists.xen.org/archives/html/xen-users/2013-05/msg00166.html
>
> As I said, I do have a generic (?3) USB audio adapter that works fine on
> bare metal on 3 different machines, but when use with my domU, all I get
> is loud crackling instead of sound. The crackling stops when the audio
> playback stops, so I'm wondering if it could be an issue to do with the
> device connecting as a USB 2.0 device to the host, but then being passed
> as a USB 1.1 to the domU; and if that is the case, whether there is a
> possible work-around.
>
> Gordan
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 5
> Date: Sun, 2 Jun 2013 12:27:50 +0100
> From: <Frank@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> To: <xen-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Subject: [Xen-users] XCP 1.6 mdadm
> Message-ID:
>       <40D5044E64C33348B8492DE1DB69CB3E22AE@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Content-Type: text/plain;     charset="us-ascii"
>
> Hello,
> Can anyone tell me why virtual disk performance on an lvm local sr
> running on mdadm raid 1 should be very slow?  Please see test results
> below.
>
>
> System 1
> XCP 1.6 running on mdadm raid1
>
> fdisk -l output
>
> ----------------------------------------------
> Disk /dev/sda: 500.1 GB, 500107862016 bytes
> 255 heads, 63 sectors/track, 60801 cylinders
> Units = cylinders of 16065 * 512 = 8225280 bytes
>
>    Device Boot      Start         End      Blocks   Id  System
> /dev/sda1   *           1          13      104391   83  Linux
> /dev/sda2              14         654     5148832+  fd  Linux raid
> autodetect
> /dev/sda3             655       13690   104711670   fd  Linux raid
> autodetect
>
> Disk /dev/sdb: 500.1 GB, 500107862016 bytes
> 255 heads, 63 sectors/track, 60801 cylinders
> Units = cylinders of 16065 * 512 = 8225280 bytes
>
>    Device Boot      Start         End      Blocks   Id  System
> /dev/sdb1   *           1          13      104391   83  Linux
> /dev/sdb2              14         654     5148832+  fd  Linux raid
> autodetect
> /dev/sdb3             655       13690   104711670   fd  Linux raid
> autodetect
>
> Disk /dev/md0: 5272 MB, 5272305664 bytes
> 2 heads, 4 sectors/track, 1287184 cylinders
> Units = cylinders of 8 * 512 = 4096 bytes
>
> Disk /dev/md0 doesn't contain a valid partition table
>
> Disk /dev/md1: 107.2 GB, 107224629248 bytes
> 2 heads, 4 sectors/track, 26177888 cylinders
> Units = cylinders of 8 * 512 = 4096 bytes
>
> Disk /dev/md1 doesn't contain a valid partition table
> -------------------------------------------------
>
> sda1 and sdb1 are both 100M boot partitions
>
> XCP running on /dev/md0 (sda2 + sdb2 raid1)
> LVM SR on /dev/md1 (sda3 + sdb3 raid1)
>
> Benchmarks are run using
> dd bs=1M count=512 if=/dev/zero of=test conv=fdatasync
>
> Benchmark 1 run in / (xcp system root) = 53.1 MB/s
> Benchmark 2 run in /sbb/test (10G logical volume on Local Storage
> formatted ext3 and mounted on /sbb/test =  94.1 MB/s
> Benchmark 3 run in root of centos 5 fully paravirtualised vm on local
> storage = 31.5 MB/s
>
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> System 2
> Single disk (USING ONE OF THE ABOVE DISKS)
> FRESH STANDARD INSTALLATION OF XCP 1.6 WITH LVM LOCAL STORAGE
>
> Standard GPT partitioning
>
> When the above benchmarks are run on this system the results are as
> follows:
>
> Benchmark 1 run in / (xcp system root) = 89.5 MB/s
> Benchmark 2 run in /sbb/test (10G logical volume on Local Storage
> formatted ext3 and mounted on /sbb/test =  92.0 MB/s
> Benchmark 3 run in root of centos 5 fully paravirtualised vm on local
> storage = 61.0 MB/s  (Same vm as above imported from xva file)
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> ------------------------------------
>
> My questions are:
> 1. Why is benchmark 1 slower on mdadm raid 1?
> 2  Why is benchmark 3 slower on mdadm raid 1?
> Yet benchmark 2 results are roughly the same.
> Am I missing something here and is it possible to tweak the performance
> of XCP on raid?
>
> Regards,
> Frank.
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> Xen-users mailing list
> Xen-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> http://lists.xen.org/xen-users
>
>
> End of Xen-users Digest, Vol 100, Issue 2
> *****************************************
>



_______________________________________________
Xen-users mailing list
Xen-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xen.org/xen-users