From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Jan Beulich" Subject: Re: iommu=0 leading to panic when system defaults to using x2apic Date: Fri, 10 Dec 2010 12:02:30 +0000 Message-ID: <4D0224E602000078000273AD@vpn.id2.novell.com> References: <4D0215E0020000780002734A@vpn.id2.novell.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Return-path: In-Reply-To: Content-Disposition: inline List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com To: Keir Fraser Cc: "xen-devel@lists.xensource.com" List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org >>> On 10.12.10 at 12:47, Keir Fraser wrote: > On 10/12/2010 10:58, "Jan Beulich" wrote: >=20 >>>>> On 10.12.10 at 11:06, Keir Fraser wrote: >>> Are you looking at xen-4.0? I think you should look at latest = xen-unstable >>=20 >> I looked at 4.0 in parallel with -unstable (non-staging) as of >> yesterday. >=20 > Even before yesterday, xen-unstable benefits from c/s 22388, which is > intended to work around the iommu=3D0/x2apic=3D0 dependency a bit. Not = sure if > it is fully satisfactory. And it is not backported to 4.0 as yet = because, > well, I don't understand this crap enough, basically. Ah, yes, that makes it better (and I must then have looked at an older snapshot of -unstable instead). Still, as you say, a lot of questions remain. On top of what you and I raised already, I wonder whether the APIC-ID-exceeding-8-bits case is really being handled correctly now when iommu=3D0. Jan