[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] Re: [Xen-devel] [V3 PATCH 9/9] pvh dom0: add opt_dom0pvh to setup.c
>>> On 28.11.13 at 12:54, George Dunlap <George.Dunlap@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Wed, Nov 27, 2013 at 8:12 PM, Mukesh Rathor <mukesh.rathor@xxxxxxxxxx> > wrote: >> On Wed, 27 Nov 2013 15:00:43 +0000 >> George Dunlap <george.dunlap@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> >>> On 11/27/2013 02:27 AM, Mukesh Rathor wrote: >>> > Add opt_dom0pvh. Note, pvh dom0 is disabled until the fixme in >>> > domain_build.c is resolved. The fixme is added by patch title: >>> > "PVH dom0: construct_dom0 changes" >>> >>> So it's been asked before but I haven't seen an answer yet: What >>> exactly is the problem here, and when might it be fixed? >> >> The problem would happen if an mmio space sits above the highest >> e820 address. Ie, the e820 didn't report it. FWIW, PV linux would not >> boot as dom0 in those cases anyways, as it doesn't support anything >> not in the e820 at present. Konrad is looking into it. >> >> As for the hardware, I've not found any where it would happen. Here's >> Jan's response where this was discussed previously: >> >> ------- >>> For testing purposes, do you have reference for hardware? I don't see >>> any here with such configuration. >> >> Nothing specific, but I know that SR-IOV virtual functions easily >> cause kernels to run out of MMIO space below 4G (namely when >> the hole is only around 1Gb or even less), and Intel must have >> knowledge of graphics cards having so huge a frame buffer that >> it can only be mapped above 4G. >> >> Jan >> ------- >> >> IMO, this is a pre-existing condition, that is not specific to >> PVH only, as such a case would not work for linux PV dom0 either. > > Why are you disabling PVH for all systems then, if it's only a small > number of systems that may have this problem, and if PV wouldn't work > on those systems anyway? The thing is - you can't tell from looking at a system at boot time whether its kernel would assign MMIO regions above 4Gb. Hence there's nothing you can qualify a conditional disable on; you could make a reasonable guess (e.g. summing up all MMIO region sizes from the PCI device BARs, including not-yet-enabled SR-IOV ones, and seeing whether that would fit in the MMIO hole below 4Gb), but I think that's not really reasonable. Otoh the feature is experimental, so I don't see why we shouldn't allow people to try this out on systems they know the kernel has no need to assign high MMIO regions. The fact that "normal" pv-ops has problems with this is irrelevant here - it's a genuine bug if it can't cope with such a scenario (and btw. one more of the many reasons making us hesitant to switch our distros to it). Jan _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
|
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |