[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] [Xen-devel] Re: [PATCH RFC] x86/acpi: don't ignore I/O APICs justbecause there's no local APIC
>>> Yinghai Lu <yhlu.kernel@xxxxxxxxx> 19.06.09 07:32 >>> >doesn't XEN support per cpu irq vector? No. >got sth from XEN 3.3 / SLES 11 > >igb 0000:81:00.0: PCI INT A -> GSI 95 (level, low) -> IRQ 95 >igb 0000:81:00.0: setting latency timer to 64 >igb 0000:81:00.0: Intel(R) Gigabit Ethernet Network Connection >igb 0000:81:00.0: eth9: (PCIe:2.5Gb/s:Width x4) 00:21:28:3a:d8:0e >igb 0000:81:00.0: eth9: PBA No: ffffff-0ff >igb 0000:81:00.0: Using MSI-X interrupts. 4 rx queue(s), 4 tx queue(s) >vendor=8086 device=3420 >(XEN) irq.c:847: dom0: invalid pirq 94 or vector -28 >igb 0000:81:00.1: PCI INT B -> GSI 94 (level, low) -> IRQ 94 >igb 0000:81:00.1: setting latency timer to 64 >(XEN) physdev.c:87: dom0: map irq with wrong vector -28 >map irq failed >(XEN) physdev.c:87: dom0: map irq with wrong vector -28 >map irq failed > >the system need a lot of MSI-X normally.. with current mainline tree >kernel, it will need about 360 irq... Do you mean 360 connected devices, or just 360 IO-APIC pins (most of which are usually unused)? In the latter case, devices using MSI (i.e. not using high numbered IO-APIC pins) should work, while devices connected to IO-APIC pins numbered 256 and higher won't work in SLE11 as-is. This limitation got fixed recently in the 3.5-unstable tree, though. The 256 active vectors limit, however, continues to exist, so the former case would still not be supported by Xen. Jan _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
|
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |