Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 6 Oct 2010 22:59:23 -0400 | From | Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <> | Subject | Re: [Xen-devel] Re: [PATCH 16/20] x86: Introduce x86_msi_ops |
| |
On Thu, Sep 23, 2010 at 04:18:42PM -0700, Bruce Edge wrote: > On Thu, Sep 23, 2010 at 7:48 AM, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk > <konrad.wilk@oracle.com> wrote: > > On Tue, Aug 31, 2010 at 02:31:40PM -0400, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote: > >> On Wed, Aug 04, 2010 at 02:19:11PM -0400, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote: > >> > From: Stefano Stabellini <stefano.stabellini@eu.citrix.com> > >> > > >> > Introduce an x86 specific indirect mechanism to setup MSIs. > >> > The MSI setup functions become function pointers in an x86_msi_ops > >> > struct, that defaults to the implementation in io_apic.c > >> > >> Hey Peter, > >> > >> I was wondering if you have time to take a look at this? > > > > ping? > >> > >> The patchset introduces a driver which takes care of allowing > >> pci_conf_read/write in a virtualized environements with PCI > >> passthrough devices. Unfortunatly for MSI operations that is not > >> so simple, so this patch alongside with the previous one > >> (https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/117105/) > >> expands the arch_* calls. This makes it possible to register on top > >> of the native callback (the virtualized ones can), if required. > >> > > Is this patch required for PCI passthrough devices that use MSI interrupts?
Yes. And also for MSI-X. However, I've just posted a new updated mechanism based on Thomas's idea - which is superior to this one.
> > I'm wondering because I'm seeing drivers for PCI passthrough are able > to init the MSI interrupts OK, but never get any interrupts with pvops > domU kernels.
The problem you are seeing is different, I think we can narrow it down to the dom0 doing something wacked.
| |