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 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).