[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 3/3] qemu-xen-trad: IGD passthrough: Expose vendor specific pci cap on host bridge.
Hello Tiejun, Since you've been working on upstreaming the Xen IGD passthru patches to qemu-upstream, you might be able to comment on this patch aswell. This patch is for qemu-traditional, but this one hasn't been acked / applied yet. It has been floating around on xen-devel for a couple of years now. It would be nice to get this finally merged to qemu-traditional.. Can you comment about best approach to implement this patch? There was some comments/concerns about the earlier versions. "[PATCH 3/3] qemu-xen-trad: IGD passthrough: Expose vendor specific pci cap on host bridge.": http://lists.xenproject.org/archives/html/xen-devel/2013-02/msg00538.html And some discussion about the patch/justification one year ago: http://lists.xen.org/archives/html/xen-devel/2013-07/msg01376.html Also G.R. wrote earlier on this thread: > I proposed an alternative to shadow the registers into the PCI config > space of the emulated host controller. > There seems no objection on this proposal. I'll do it when I got some spare > time. Thanks, -- Pasi On Tue, Aug 06, 2013 at 11:44:52AM +0800, G.R. wrote: > On Tue, Aug 6, 2013 at 12:15 AM, Pasi Kärkkäinen <pasik@xxxxxx> wrote: > > On Tue, Jul 16, 2013 at 01:55:20AM +0300, Pasi Kärkkäinen wrote: > >> > >>How was that diagnosed? Perhaps that information can be part of the > >> > >>source > >> > >>code to help in the future with diagnosiing which caps are needed and > >> > >>which ones can be blacklisted? > >> > >> > >> > > > >> > >I guess that's a question mostly for Ross/Jean as they're the original > >> > >authors of the patch? > >> > > >> > We discovered the issue with Windows guests running the vendor > >> > drivers for the passed in IGD graphics device. Under certain > >> > circumstances (resuming from S3/S4 IIRC), the guest would BSOD. I > >> > finally tracked it down to a bad state in the resuming driver > >> > because it was not coded to handle the vendor capabilities not being > >> > present on the host bridge. BTW, those capabilities are flags > >> > indicating what features the IGD card has - their exact meaning is > >> > of course proprietary. > >> > > >> > I cannot say it was only a problem on Windows but rather that that > >> > is the only place we ever saw it. > >> > > >> > I never saw any other capabilities on the hosts bridges at that > >> > time, just vendor ones so the patch just handled that. If there were > >> > other capabilities, I would think it would have to be determined on > >> > a case by case basis whether they were included. Inclusion of each > >> > new type would have different ramifications it seems. > >> > > >> > >> Thanks for the explanation. I guess parts of that should go to the patch > >> description aswell.. > >> > > > > Now patch 2/3 has been applied to qemu-traditional, so only this patch 3/3 > > is missing from qemu-traditional from this series. > > > > Any other changes outstanding? or only to add some of Ross's comments to > > the patch description (and/or sources) ? > > > I'll have to rework this patch -- Jan believe the code is not very > clean with regard to offset / size handling. > > I proposed an alternative to shadow the registers into the PCI config > space of the emulated host controller. > There seems no objection on this proposal. I'll do it when I got some > spare time. > > > Thanks, > > > > -- Pasi > > _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
|
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |