From: Keir Fraser <keir@xen.org>
To: "Kay, Allen M" <allen.m.kay@intel.com>,
Jan Beulich <JBeulich@novell.com>,
"Zhang, Yang Z" <yang.z.zhang@intel.com>
Cc: "xen-devel@lists.xensource.com" <xen-devel@lists.xensource.com>,
"Han, Weidong" <weidong.han@intel.com>
Subject: Re: iommu=0 leading to panic when system defaults to using x2apic
Date: Tue, 14 Dec 2010 07:44:53 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <C92CD0F5.CC9C%keir@xen.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <987664A83D2D224EAE907B061CE93D530193C38298@orsmsx505.amr.corp.intel.com>
Well, if it is a restriction imposed by cluster mode, you know the next
question is obvious: Why do we bother with cluster mode at all? I don't see
that it yields us any advantage over physical mode, and we could use
physical mode without interrupt remapping, that would seem to be a big bonus
and simplification? Could we just kill our x2apic cluster mode logic?
-- Keir
On 14/12/2010 02:25, "Kay, Allen M" <allen.m.kay@intel.com> wrote:
> Keir/Jan,
>
> My understanding is that cluster mode requires it. I will get back to you
> guys after I dig out the details on this - did not get a chance to do this
> today.
>
> Allen
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Keir Fraser [mailto:keir.xen@gmail.com] On Behalf Of Keir Fraser
> Sent: Monday, December 13, 2010 1:03 AM
> To: Jan Beulich; Kay, Allen M; Zhang, Yang Z
> Cc: Han, Weidong; xen-devel@lists.xensource.com
> Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] iommu=0 leading to panic when system defaults to
> using x2apic
>
> On 13/12/2010 08:15, "Jan Beulich" <JBeulich@novell.com> wrote:
>
>>>>> On 11.12.10 at 01:07, "Kay, Allen M" <allen.m.kay@intel.com> wrote:
>>> Yes, interrupt remapping is needed to be the intermediary between legacy
>>> IOxAPIC and MSI devices and the new x2APIC in the CPU.
>>
>> But isn't this only when there are APIC IDs beyond 255?
>
> Apparently not, since even Linux requires irq remapping even when none of
> the APIC IDs are greater than 255. Unless running on kvm or xen. I don't
> fully understand this particular restriction, mind you.
>
> Actually, my guess is that x2apic mode requires a different format of APIC
> message with a 32-bit APICID field, legacy IOxAPIC and MSI devices do not
> support the new message format, and so irq remapping hardware is required to
> bridge the two formats, even if no actual irq remapping is occurring.
>
> Is that a canny guess, Allen?
>
> -- Keir
>
>> Jan
>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: Keir Fraser [mailto:keir.xen@gmail.com] On Behalf Of Keir Fraser
>>> Sent: Friday, December 10, 2010 10:50 AM
>>> To: Kay, Allen M; Jan Beulich; Zhang, Yang Z
>>> Cc: xen-devel@lists.xensource.com; Han, Weidong
>>> Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] iommu=0 leading to panic when system defaults to
>>> using x2apic
>>>
>>> Ah, and the interrupt remapping dependency is because PCI(e) devices cannot
>>> address 32-bit APIC IDs?
>>>
>>> -- Keir
>>>
>>> On 10/12/2010 18:26, "Kay, Allen M" <allen.m.kay@intel.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> The architectural requirement is actually between interrupt remapping and
>>>> x2apic. Since interrupt remapping is part of the VT-d feature so current
>>>> software requires all VT-d features enabled in order for x2apic to be
>>> enabled.
>>>>
>>>> Strictly speaking DMA remapping is not required for x2apic. However,
>>>> queued
>>>> invalidation is required since interrupt remapping requires queued
>>>> invalidation. So x2apic dependency is as follows:
>>>>
>>>> x2apic->interrupt remapping->queued invalidation
>>>>
>>>> Due to historical reasons, the new VT-d features were built on top of the
>>>> old
>>>> ones as they become available. Is there a requirement to separate this
>>>> out?
>>>> If so, we will need to re-design iommu boot parameter which took a while to
>>>> get it right so most systems can now boot successfully.
>>>>
>>>> Allen
>>
>>
>
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-12-14 7:44 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 25+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-12-10 9:12 iommu=0 leading to panic when system defaults to using x2apic Jan Beulich
2010-12-10 10:06 ` Keir Fraser
2010-12-10 10:58 ` Jan Beulich
2010-12-10 11:47 ` Keir Fraser
2010-12-10 12:02 ` Jan Beulich
2010-12-10 15:00 ` Zhang, Yang Z
2010-12-10 15:39 ` Jan Beulich
2010-12-10 18:26 ` Kay, Allen M
2010-12-10 18:49 ` Keir Fraser
2010-12-11 0:07 ` Kay, Allen M
2010-12-13 8:15 ` Jan Beulich
2010-12-13 9:03 ` Keir Fraser
2010-12-14 2:25 ` Kay, Allen M
2010-12-14 7:44 ` Keir Fraser [this message]
2010-12-14 7:59 ` Keir Fraser
2010-12-15 2:35 ` Kay, Allen M
2010-12-14 8:21 ` Jan Beulich
2010-12-14 8:46 ` Weidong Han
2010-12-14 9:12 ` Jan Beulich
2010-12-14 16:53 ` Kay, Allen M
2010-12-14 17:06 ` Jan Beulich
2010-12-14 17:08 ` Jan Beulich
2010-12-14 17:52 ` Yinghai Lu
2010-12-14 18:18 ` Keir Fraser
2010-12-15 7:53 ` 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=C92CD0F5.CC9C%keir@xen.org \
--to=keir@xen.org \
--cc=JBeulich@novell.com \
--cc=allen.m.kay@intel.com \
--cc=weidong.han@intel.com \
--cc=xen-devel@lists.xensource.com \
--cc=yang.z.zhang@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.