[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] Re: [help] Xen 4.14.5 on Devuan 4.0 Chimaera, regression from Xen 4.0.1
On 10.03.2023 09:51, Jan Beulich wrote: > Betreff: Re: [help] Xen 4.14.5 on Devuan 4.0 Chimaera, regression from Xen > 4.0.1 > > On 09.03.2023 21:37, Andrew Cooper wrote: > > On 09/03/2023 7:34 pm, tachyon_gun@xxxxxx wrote: > >> Subject: > >> [help] Xen 4.14.5 on Devuan 4.0 Chimaera > >> From: > >> tachyon_gun@xxxxxx > >> Date: > >> 09/03/2023, 7:34 pm > >> > >> To: > >> xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > >> > >> > >> Hello. > >> > >> Following the advice of Andrew Cooper (thanks for helping out) over on > >> OFTC.net in #xen, I'll post this here. > >> If this is the wrong place, please move it to the right section of your > >> mailing lists. > >> > >> I got some problems running Xen 4.14.5 on Devuan 4.0. > >> > >> The AMD-Vi and I/O virtualisation are not being enabled when booting up > >> the host system with Xen. > >> > >> Hardware used: > >> Mainboard: Gigabyte GA-890FXA-UD5, BIOS version F6 (2010.11.24, the > >> latest version) > >> CPU: AMD Phenom II X4 910e > >> Memory: 16GB > >> Storage: 2TB Crucial MX500 > >> > >> A short snippet of what I see when invoking "xl dmesg": > >> > >> (XEN) No southbridge IO-APIC found in IVRS table > >> (XEN) AMD-Vi: Error initialization > >> (XEN) I/O virtualisation disabled > >> > >> What I would like to see (taken from Xen 4.0.1 running on Debian > >> Squeeze, in use since 2011): > >> > >> (XEN) IOAPIC[0]: apic_id 8, version 33, address 0xfec00000, GSI 0-23 > >> (XEN) Enabling APIC mode: Flat. Using 1 I/O APICs > >> (XEN) Using scheduler: SMP Credit Scheduler (credit) > >> (XEN) Detected 2611.936 MHz processor. > >> (XEN) Initing memory sharing. > >> (XEN) HVM: ASIDs enabled. > >> (XEN) HVM: SVM enabled > >> (XEN) HVM: Hardware Assisted Paging detected. > >> (XEN) AMD-Vi: IOMMU 0 Enabled. > >> (XEN) I/O virtualisation enabled > >> > >> My question would be if this is "normal" behaviour due to older hardware > >> being used with newer versions of Xen (compared to the old 4.0.1) or if > >> this is a bug. > >> If the latter, has this been addressed already in newer version (4.14+)? > > No, the code there is still the same. The commit introducing the check > (06bbcaf48d09 ["AMD IOMMU: fail if there is no southbridge IO-APIC"]) > specifically provided for a workaround: "iommu=no-intremap" on the Xen > command line. Could you give this a try? (As per below this could be > what we want to do "automatically" in such a situation, i.e. without > the need for a command line option. But you then still would face a > perceived regression of interrupt remapping being disabled on such a > system.) > > The other possible workaround, "iommu=no-amd-iommu-perdev-intremap", > is something I rather wouldn't want to recommend, but you may still > want to give it a try. Thanks for your reply. I added the lines you suggested and it seems that "AMD-Vi: IOMMU 0" and "I/O virtualisation" is enabled again. There are only minor differences in the "xl dmesg" output. In the one with "iommu=no-amd-iommu-perdev-intremap", the line "No southbridge IO-APIC found in IVRS table" is listed. Though I yet have to test a HVM domU with passthrough. I'll attach the two "xl dmesg" files and a third one from the old version of Xen. > >> I'll attach some log files (hypervisor.log, dom0.log, xl_info.log, > >> lspci_vvv.log, acpi.dmp, ivrs.dat, ivrs.dsl). > >> > >> Thank you for your time. > > > > Let me braindump the investigation so far before I forget it. > > > > Xen requires that there is an IVRS special-device record describing an > > IO-APIC 00:14.0. This check failing is the source of the "No > > southbridge" message, and the cause of the IOMMU(s) being turned off. > > > > The MADT and IVRS tables agree that there is one IO-APIC in the system, > > but that's the northbridge IO-APIC, not the southbridge. > > > > The block diagram for the southbridge does have a PIC/IO-APIC as part of > > the PCI bridge, so honestly I was expecting the MADT to describe 2 > > IO-APICs. But OTOH, I could see this legitimately not existing in > > configurations where the PCI bridge isn't in use. > > > > `xl dmesg` does have a few unknown irqs, so there might be something > > down in the southbridge really generating interrupts. Or there might be > > a IRQ misconfiguration elsewhere, and this is just a red herring. > > > > However, a consequence of the northbridge and southbridge being separate > > chips means that all southbridge IO is fully encapsulated by the IOMMU > > in the northbridge. > > > > So irrespective of whether there is ah IO-APIC operating properly in the > > southbridge, and whether or not it's properly described, I think Xen's > > insistence that there must be an IVRS special-device entry for it is bogus. > > > > > > Furthermore, Xen's decisions are monumentally stupid. It takes a > > specifically safe (IOMMU-wise) system, and because it can't figure out a > > partial aspect of interrupt handling the southbridge, decided that the > > system can't be safe (a false conclusion) and turns the IOMMU off fully > > to compensate, which makes the system concretely less safe. Also, thank you Andrew for bringing this in. > So this touches once again the area of the fuzzy split between the IOMMU > being disabled as a whole (meaning DMA+interrupt remapping off) vs only > one of the two being off (where presently we are unable to turn off just > DMA remapping). Indeed the original Linux commit, which our change was > inspired by, results in merely interrupt remapping getting turned off > (afaict), and that hasn't changed. (Would be nice to have this confirmed > for the system in question, i.e. without Xen underneath Linux.) It would > certainly be possible for us to do so too - it might be a one line change: Could you elaborate on that one? Should I test something else? > @@ ... @@ static int __init cf_check parse_ivrs_table(struct > if ( !error && !sb_ioapic ) > { > if ( amd_iommu_perdev_intremap ) > - error = -ENXIO; > + iommu_intremap = false; > printk("%sNo southbridge IO-APIC found in IVRS table\n", > amd_iommu_perdev_intremap ? XENLOG_ERR : XENLOG_WARNING); > } > > but only if there aren't any earlier decisions that need undoing, and > only if all subsequent code will properly honor that turning off of > intremap. I'll try to get to doing the necessary audit some time next > week. Denis Attachment:
hypervisor_iommu=no-amd-iommu-perdev-intremap.log Attachment:
hypervisor_iommu=no-intremap.log Attachment:
hypervisor_old_xen_iommu=debug_loglvl=all_guest_loglvl=all.log
|
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |