From: "Chen, Tiejun" <tiejun.chen@intel.com>
To: Jan Beulich <JBeulich@suse.com>
Cc: Ross Lagerwall <ross.lagerwall@citrix.com>,
Xen-devel <xen-devel@lists.xen.org>, Keir Fraser <keir@xen.org>,
len.brown@intel.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] mwait_idle: Broadwell support
Date: Fri, 17 Oct 2014 09:22:56 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <54406F70.7050501@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <543FECE8020000780003F43A@mail.emea.novell.com>
On 2014/10/16 22:06, Jan Beulich wrote:
>>>> On 16.10.14 at 14:54, <tiejun.chen@intel.com> wrote:
>> Did you guys validate this in real machine? Or any potential side affect?
>>
>> When I do IGD GFX passthrough with qemu-xen-traditional, I found in the
>> boot phase of VM, the target will reboot. After I revert this everything
>> is fine.
>
> Please be more precise. What is "target" here? Host? Guest?
The real target is BDW based on stepping E. When I use
qemu-xen-traditional to validate IGD passthrough like this,
gfx_passthru=1
pci=["00:02.0", "00:14.0"]
Here the device at "00:02.0" is IGD device, another is USB controller.
And we should pass 'no-sharept' to disable shared EPT table since you
know there is a well-know RMRR problem I'm trying to fix.
During the Windows7 guest VM boot phase, the physical machine reboot
directly.
> Also, reporting issues just verbally (i.e. without any logs or other
> actual technical information) rarely makes a lot of sense.
As I said above the machine reboot directly. I can't see any output.
>
>> Note I don't add anything into codes. Here I just build Xen unstable 4.5
>> to use qemu-xen-traditional. And additionally, my BDW is based on
>> stepping E, and guest is WindXP.
Any other technical information you guys want to know?
>
> But the change is only about C-state handling for a particular
> CPU model. There's really nothing being added that doesn't
> already work fine elsewhere. I.e. this patch being the apparent
> culprit of a problem you see makes it relatively likely that your
> hardware is having some issue.
Yes I also suspect this point but I tried two machine, I still can see
the same problem. Maybe this is related to CPU stepping, BIOS or some
errata we may ignore previously. So I just post this to ask if anybody
know this in detail.
Thanks
Tiejun
>
> Jan
>
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-10-17 1:22 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-09-08 12:42 [PATCH 1/2] mwait_idle: Disable Baytrail Core and Module C6 auto-demotion Ross Lagerwall
2014-09-08 12:42 ` [PATCH 2/2] mwait_idle: Broadwell support Ross Lagerwall
2014-09-08 13:24 ` Jan Beulich
2014-10-16 12:54 ` Chen, Tiejun
2014-10-16 14:06 ` Jan Beulich
2014-10-17 1:22 ` Chen, Tiejun [this message]
2014-10-17 8:40 ` Jan Beulich
2014-10-24 3:02 ` Chen, Tiejun
2014-10-17 1:00 ` Chen, Tiejun
2014-09-08 13:22 ` [PATCH 1/2] mwait_idle: Disable Baytrail Core and Module C6 auto-demotion Jan Beulich
2014-09-08 14:02 ` Ross Lagerwall
2014-09-08 14:20 ` 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=54406F70.7050501@intel.com \
--to=tiejun.chen@intel.com \
--cc=JBeulich@suse.com \
--cc=keir@xen.org \
--cc=len.brown@intel.com \
--cc=ross.lagerwall@citrix.com \
--cc=xen-devel@lists.xen.org \
/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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).