RE: [Xen-devel] RE: regression from IRQ handling changes?

["Zhang, Xiantao" <xiantao.zhang@xxxxxxxxx>]

Okay, I will have a look about it. As you said, it should be easy to fix it. 
Xiantao

Keir Fraser wrote:
> It isn't hard to boot UP and with APIC disabled to test this case. I
> would prefer to contineu to support it for a while longer, so please
> do take a look at it Xiantao.
> 
>  Thanks,
>  Keir
> 
> On 14/09/2009 07:59, "Jan Beulich" <JBeulich@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> 
>> While agreeing from a technical perspective, customer perspective on
>> our products is different: Whenever something like proper UP
>> (no-APIC) 
>> support breaks in our products, we almost immediately get reports of
>> this, since there will always be someone running Xen e.g. on an old
>> laptop (no matter whether Xen is meant to be run there).
>> 
>> Less frequent for ACPI, but quite recently we had a report there too
>> (and 
>> I'm under the impression that no-ACPI support has been broken for
>> quite 
>> a while) - luckily, a BIOS update fixed the issue for them, so I
>> didn't have to look into the issue in more detail.
>> 
>> Otoh, if we really wanted to switch over to APIC and ACPI being a
>> requirement, I wouldn't mind that step - it just should be that it's
>> clear whether this is intended to work. And if it isn't, quite a bit
>> of code should be eliminated/cleaned up. 
>> 
>> Jan
>> 
>>>>> "Zhang, Xiantao" <xiantao.zhang@xxxxxxxxx> 12.09.09 03:58 >>>
>> Jan,
>>     Frankly speaking, we haven't done the testings which can cover
>> non-APIC case.  Does anybody really care about such case now ?  I
>> can't figure out the reason why modern system doesn't leverage apic.
>> If non-APIC case is necessary, maybe we need to fix it.   As I know,
>> Xen is becoming more and more dependent on the components (APIC,
>> ACPI....), so non-APIC or non-ACPI cases maybe becoming less and
>> less important. 
>> Xiantao
>> 
>> Jan Beulich wrote:
>>> Using c/s 20189, I can't boot my (only) system without APIC
>>> anymore. I didn't have time to look into the issue in more detail
>>> so far, but since it seems likely that this is connected to the
>>> recent per-CPU-IRQ-vector changes, I wanted to ask whether these
>>> had been tested on APIC-less systems. 
>>> 
>>> Thanks, Jan
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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