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

[Keir Fraser <Keir.Fraser@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

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



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