[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] Re: [Xen-devel] [Xen-users] Xen 4.7.0 graphics pass through problems (Win10, AMD Radeon)
On 2016-09-14 15:30, George Dunlap wrote: On 14/09/16 14:23, Andrew Cooper wrote:On 14/09/16 13:50, Jan Beulich wrote:On 14.09.16 at 13:34, <george.dunlap@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:On 2016-09-09 09:51, Peter Milesson wrote:[snip]I've been using Xen for 3 years, starting out with 4.2, and I've been upgrading regularly, and installed 4.7.0 today. I'm using Windows 10, 64-bit with PCI pass through in a VM with PV-drivers, using a AMD Radeon HD6450 card (AMD graphics cards don't seem to need graphics pass through) Previously (up till Xen 4.6.3), the graphics output has displayed some shorter lines, a bit like thin coarse snow, when watching videos. The distortions stayed within the movie, and was tolerable. After upgrade to Xen 4.7.0, the video performance is seriously ugly. Just for example, I open cnn.com and move the mouse pointer up and down over the photos, which creates a bunch of flickering lines over the display. The same with moving content in Youtube for example. Or opening a Cygwin terminal window and scrolling through a file. Terrible. Nothing else has changed, only the Xen version.[snip] On Fri, Sep 9, 2016 at 10:35 AM, Peter Milesson <miles@xxxxxxxx> wrote:Hi again, I've been playing around a bit more. It seems one of the problems is that I passed a couple of PCI-devices (USB controllers) to the VM, beside the graphics card. When I pass the USB-devices individually in the VM configuration file (usbdevice=['tablet','host:1.4','host:1:9','host:x.y']), the display problems seem to be more or less gone.Jan / Andy, Can you think of anything that's changed between 4.6 and 4.7 that would cause the performance problems he's describing when both a video card and a usb controller are passed through, but not when only the video card is passed through?Not really, no. Peter - are there any indications of problems in one or more of the logs (Xen, xl, qemu)? Did you try running a debug build of all Xen components?Furthermore, does "Nothing else has changed, only the Xen version." mean switching your distro packages between two versions of xen, or literally only switching the hypervisor itself.I assume he's using "Xen" to mean the whole Xen system -- hypervisor + tools + qemu.A substantial quantity of the complexity here is in qemu, rather than Xen.Rather than the hypervisor, you mean. Another thing worth asking, Peter: Have you tried running with qemu-traditional (by adding the line below to your config file) rather than qemu-upstream, to see if that makes a difference? device_model_version="qemu-xen-traditional" qemu-traditional almost ever changes, so if it worked better, then that would point the finger at changes in qemu (at which point we would have to bring in a different set of people to help diagnose it). -George Hi George,I have always been using the default. I never had the need to set a specific device model. So it's qemu-upstream in my case. Best regards, Peter _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
|
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |