From: Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@citrix.com>
To: Jan Beulich <JBeulich@novell.com>
Cc: George Dunlap <George.Dunlap@eu.citrix.com>,
Olaf Hering <olaf@aepfle.de>,
Yunhong Jiang <yunhong.jiang@intel.com>,
"xen-devel@lists.xensource.com" <xen-devel@lists.xensource.com>
Subject: Re: xen-unstable warn_on in msi.c:636
Date: Mon, 1 Aug 2011 14:16:01 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4E36A711.3060007@citrix.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4E32D1C20200007800073CFD@nat28.tlf.novell.com>
On 29/07/11 15:29, Jan Beulich wrote:
>>>> On 30.06.11 at 15:31, George Dunlap <George.Dunlap@eu.citrix.com> wrote:
>> On Thu, Jun 30, 2011 at 1:17 PM, Jan Beulich <JBeulich@novell.com> wrote:
>>>>>> On 30.06.11 at 14:03, George Dunlap <George.Dunlap@eu.citrix.com> wrote:
>>>> Olaf / Jan / all, what do you think of the attached patch, which
>>>> teaches the MSI code how to deal with 0 pbas?
>>> No, definitely not an option. They simply must not be zero. The
>>> problem just is that the BARs for virtual functions all read as zero
>>> (and the real value must be calculated from information from the
>>> PF's config space).
>> But at the moment it IS zero, and this "real value" is simply not
>> being calculated.
>>
>> I realize this needs to be fixed the Right Way eventually, but at the
>> moment anyone who uses SRIOV will have a bunch of scary warnings which
>> they can't do anything about except ignore; and it's never a good idea
>> to condition people to ignore this kind of warning.
>>
>> If the current situation is safe enough that fixing it is a low
>> priority, then it's safe enough to remove the warnings for the time
>> being. If it's not safe enough to remove the warnings, then it's not
>> safe enough to leave and a fix needs to be a priority.
> Attached a patch that eliminates the warnings for me (tested on a single
> system only so far). It ought to apply cleanly to current tip of -unstable.
>
> Jan
Tested on 2 Citrix SR-IOV boxes:
1) Dell R710 with igb, ixgbe and sfc virtual functions
2) Netscalar with 320 individual ixgbe virtual functions across 40 VMs
I tested against our Xen-4.1.1, but the patch applied cleanly. There
seems no adverse affect on VF functionality.
--
Andrew Cooper - Dom0 Kernel Engineer, Citrix XenServer
T: +44 (0)1223 225 900, http://www.citrix.com
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-08-01 13:16 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-07-29 14:29 xen-unstable warn_on in msi.c:636 Jan Beulich
2011-08-01 13:16 ` Andrew Cooper [this message]
2011-08-12 19:57 ` Olaf Hering
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2011-06-30 9:17 Olaf Hering
2011-06-30 9:30 ` Jan Beulich
2011-06-30 12:03 ` George Dunlap
2011-06-30 12:17 ` Jan Beulich
2011-06-30 13:31 ` George Dunlap
2011-06-30 14:18 ` Jan Beulich
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=4E36A711.3060007@citrix.com \
--to=andrew.cooper3@citrix.com \
--cc=George.Dunlap@eu.citrix.com \
--cc=JBeulich@novell.com \
--cc=olaf@aepfle.de \
--cc=xen-devel@lists.xensource.com \
--cc=yunhong.jiang@intel.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.