Hi all,
This is the test report of xen-unstable tree. We''ve switched our Dom0
to upstream Linux 3.1-rc7 instead of Jeremy''s 2.6.32.x tree.
We''ve also upgraded our nightly test system from RHEL5.5 to RHEL6.2.
We found four new issues and one old issue got fixed.
Version Info
================================================================xen-changeset:
24911:d7fe4cd831a0
Dom0: linux.git 3.1-rc7 (commit: d93dc5c4...)
================================================================
New issues(4)
=============1. when detaching a VF from hvm guest, "xl dmesg" will
show some warning information
http://bugzilla.xen.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=1809
2. Dom0 hang when bootup a guest with a VF(the guest has been bootup with a
different VF before)
http://bugzilla.xen.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=1810
3. RHEL6.2/6.1 guest runs quite slow
http://bugzilla.xen.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=1811
4. after detaching a VF from a guest, shutdown the guest is very slow
http://bugzilla.xen.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=1812
Fixed issue(1)
=============1. Dom0 crash on power-off
http://bugzilla.xen.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=1740
----kernel3.1.0 doesn''t have this issue now
Old issues(5)
=============1. [ACPI] System cann''t resume after do suspend
http://bugzilla.xen.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=1707
2. [XL]"xl vcpu-set" causes dom0 crash or panic
http://bugzilla.xen.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=1730
3. [VT-D]fail to detach NIC from guest
http://bugzilla.xen.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=1736
4. Sometimes Xen panic on ia32pae Sandybridge when restore guest
http://bugzilla.xen.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=1747
5. [VT-D] device reset fail when create/destroy guest
http://bugzilla.xen.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=1752
Thanks
Zhou, Chao
>>> On 13.03.12 at 10:18, "Zhou, Chao" <chao.zhou@intel.com> wrote: > 1. when detaching a VF from hvm guest, "xl dmesg" will show some warning > information > http://bugzilla.xen.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=1809Could you give the qemu-traditional patch below a try (and report the resulting "xl dmesg" regardless of whether this eliminates the warning)? Jan --- a/hw/pass-through.c +++ b/hw/pass-through.c @@ -1969,11 +1969,9 @@ static void pt_unregister_regions(struct if ( type == PCI_ADDRESS_SPACE_MEM || type == PCI_ADDRESS_SPACE_MEM_PREFETCH ) { - ret = xc_domain_memory_mapping(xc_handle, domid, - assigned_device->bases[i].e_physbase >> XC_PAGE_SHIFT, - assigned_device->bases[i].access.maddr >> XC_PAGE_SHIFT, - (e_size+XC_PAGE_SIZE-1) >> XC_PAGE_SHIFT, - DPCI_REMOVE_MAPPING); + ret = _pt_iomem_helper(assigned_device, i, + assigned_device->bases[i].e_physbase, + e_size, DPCI_REMOVE_MAPPING); if ( ret != 0 ) { PT_LOG("Error: remove old mem mapping failed!\n");
Pasi Kärkkäinen
2012-Mar-13 15:38 UTC
Re: VMX status report. Xen:24911 & Dom0: d93dc5c4... Nested VMX testing?
On Tue, Mar 13, 2012 at 09:18:27AM +0000, Zhou, Chao wrote:> Hi all, >Hello,> This is the test report of xen-unstable tree. We''ve switched our Dom0 to upstream Linux 3.1-rc7 instead of Jeremy''s 2.6.32.x tree. > We''ve also upgraded our nightly test system from RHEL5.5 to RHEL6.2. > We found four new issues and one old issue got fixed. >Is Intel planning to start testing Nested VMX ? It seems AMD has done a lot of testing with Nested SVM with Xen.. Thanks, -- Pasi> Version Info > ================================================================> xen-changeset: 24911:d7fe4cd831a0 > Dom0: linux.git 3.1-rc7 (commit: d93dc5c4...) > ================================================================> > > New issues(4) > =============> 1. when detaching a VF from hvm guest, "xl dmesg" will show some warning information > http://bugzilla.xen.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=1809 > 2. Dom0 hang when bootup a guest with a VF(the guest has been bootup with a different VF before) > http://bugzilla.xen.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=1810 > 3. RHEL6.2/6.1 guest runs quite slow > http://bugzilla.xen.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=1811 > 4. after detaching a VF from a guest, shutdown the guest is very slow > http://bugzilla.xen.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=1812 > > Fixed issue(1) > =============> 1. Dom0 crash on power-off > http://bugzilla.xen.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=1740 > ----kernel3.1.0 doesn''t have this issue now > > Old issues(5) > =============> 1. [ACPI] System cann''t resume after do suspend > http://bugzilla.xen.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=1707 > 2. [XL]"xl vcpu-set" causes dom0 crash or panic > http://bugzilla.xen.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=1730 > 3. [VT-D]fail to detach NIC from guest > http://bugzilla.xen.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=1736 > 4. Sometimes Xen panic on ia32pae Sandybridge when restore guest > http://bugzilla.xen.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=1747 > 5. [VT-D] device reset fail when create/destroy guest > http://bugzilla.xen.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=1752 > > > Thanks > Zhou, Chao > > _______________________________________________ > Xen-devel mailing list > Xen-devel@lists.xen.org > http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk
2012-Mar-13 16:55 UTC
Re: VMX status report. Xen:24911 & Dom0: d93dc5c4...
On Tue, Mar 13, 2012 at 09:18:27AM +0000, Zhou, Chao wrote:> Hi all, > > This is the test report of xen-unstable tree. We''ve switched our Dom0 to upstream Linux 3.1-rc7 instead of Jeremy''s 2.6.32.x tree.Nice! Thanks for doing that. Thought some of the issues reported below I think are fixed in 3.3.. Especially the ''xl vcpu-set'' one - which I think is also back-ported to the 3.x stable kernel.> We''ve also upgraded our nightly test system from RHEL5.5 to RHEL6.2. > We found four new issues and one old issue got fixed. > > Version Info > ================================================================> xen-changeset: 24911:d7fe4cd831a0 > Dom0: linux.git 3.1-rc7 (commit: d93dc5c4...) > ================================================================> > > New issues(4) > =============> 1. when detaching a VF from hvm guest, "xl dmesg" will show some warning information > http://bugzilla.xen.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=1809 > 2. Dom0 hang when bootup a guest with a VF(the guest has been bootup with a different VF before) > http://bugzilla.xen.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=1810 > 3. RHEL6.2/6.1 guest runs quite slow > http://bugzilla.xen.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=1811 > 4. after detaching a VF from a guest, shutdown the guest is very slow > http://bugzilla.xen.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=1812 > > Fixed issue(1) > =============> 1. Dom0 crash on power-off > http://bugzilla.xen.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=1740 > ----kernel3.1.0 doesn''t have this issue now > > Old issues(5)These old ones are with 3.1.x?> =============> 1. [ACPI] System cann''t resume after do suspend > http://bugzilla.xen.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=1707 > 2. [XL]"xl vcpu-set" causes dom0 crash or panic > http://bugzilla.xen.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=1730 > 3. [VT-D]fail to detach NIC from guest > http://bugzilla.xen.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=1736 > 4. Sometimes Xen panic on ia32pae Sandybridge when restore guest > http://bugzilla.xen.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=1747 > 5. [VT-D] device reset fail when create/destroy guest > http://bugzilla.xen.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=1752 > > > Thanks > Zhou, Chao > > _______________________________________________ > Xen-devel mailing list > Xen-devel@lists.xen.org > http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
> -----Original Message----- > From: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org > [mailto:xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org] On Behalf Of Jan Beulich > Sent: Tuesday, March 13, 2012 7:34 PM > To: Zhou, Chao > Cc: xen-devel > Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] VMX status report. Xen:24911 & Dom0: > d93dc5c4... > > >>> On 13.03.12 at 10:18, "Zhou, Chao" <chao.zhou@intel.com> wrote: > > 1. when detaching a VF from hvm guest, "xl dmesg" will show some > warning > > information > > http://bugzilla.xen.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=1809 > > Could you give the qemu-traditional patch below a try (and report > the resulting "xl dmesg" regardless of whether this eliminates the > warning)? >Yes, we tried your below patch. The warning still exists. Attached is the output of ''xl dmesg'' after detaching a VF. Jay> Jan > > --- a/hw/pass-through.c > +++ b/hw/pass-through.c > @@ -1969,11 +1969,9 @@ static void pt_unregister_regions(struct > if ( type == PCI_ADDRESS_SPACE_MEM || > type == PCI_ADDRESS_SPACE_MEM_PREFETCH ) > { > - ret = xc_domain_memory_mapping(xc_handle, domid, > - assigned_device->bases[i].e_physbase >> > XC_PAGE_SHIFT, > - assigned_device->bases[i].access.maddr >> > XC_PAGE_SHIFT, > - (e_size+XC_PAGE_SIZE-1) >> XC_PAGE_SHIFT, > - DPCI_REMOVE_MAPPING); > + ret = _pt_iomem_helper(assigned_device, i, > + > assigned_device->bases[i].e_physbase, > + e_size, > DPCI_REMOVE_MAPPING); > if ( ret != 0 ) > { > PT_LOG("Error: remove old mem mapping failed!\n"); > > > > _______________________________________________ > Xen-devel mailing list > Xen-devel@lists.xen.org > http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel_______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xen.org http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
Ren, Yongjie
2012-Mar-14 08:00 UTC
Re: VMX status report. Xen:24911 & Dom0: d93dc5c4... Nested VMX testing?
> -----Original Message----- > From: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org > [mailto:xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org] On Behalf Of Pasi K?rkk?inen > Sent: Tuesday, March 13, 2012 11:39 PM > To: Zhou, Chao > Cc: xen-devel@lists.xensource.com > Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] VMX status report. Xen:24911 & Dom0: > d93dc5c4... Nested VMX testing? > > On Tue, Mar 13, 2012 at 09:18:27AM +0000, Zhou, Chao wrote: > > Hi all, > > > > Hello, > > > This is the test report of xen-unstable tree. We''ve switched our Dom0 to > upstream Linux 3.1-rc7 instead of Jeremy''s 2.6.32.x tree. > > We''ve also upgraded our nightly test system from RHEL5.5 to RHEL6.2. > > We found four new issues and one old issue got fixed. > > > > Is Intel planning to start testing Nested VMX ?Yes, we''ve made several automated test cases for Nested VMX. The bad news is there''s some bug on Nested VMX. From my recent test, the following is the status for Nested VMX. Xen on Xen: failed. L1 Xen guest can''t boot up. It hangs at the boot for xen hypervisor. KVM on Xen: pass. L2 RHEL5.5 guest can boot up on L1 KVM guest. (We use the same version of dom0 and xen-unstable as mentioned in the report.) Intel will make more effort on Nested VMX bug fixing this year.> It seems AMD has done a lot of testing with Nested SVM with Xen.. > > Thanks, > > -- Pasi > > > > Version Info > > > ===========================================================> ====> > xen-changeset: 24911:d7fe4cd831a0 > > Dom0: linux.git 3.1-rc7 (commit: d93dc5c4...) > > > ===========================================================> ====> > > > > > New issues(4) > > =============> > 1. when detaching a VF from hvm guest, "xl dmesg" will show some > warning information > > http://bugzilla.xen.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=1809 > > 2. Dom0 hang when bootup a guest with a VF(the guest has been bootup > with a different VF before) > > http://bugzilla.xen.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=1810 > > 3. RHEL6.2/6.1 guest runs quite slow > > http://bugzilla.xen.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=1811 > > 4. after detaching a VF from a guest, shutdown the guest is very slow > > http://bugzilla.xen.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=1812 > > > > Fixed issue(1) > > =============> > 1. Dom0 crash on power-off > > http://bugzilla.xen.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=1740 > > ----kernel3.1.0 doesn''t have this issue now > > > > Old issues(5) > > =============> > 1. [ACPI] System cann''t resume after do suspend > > http://bugzilla.xen.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=1707 > > 2. [XL]"xl vcpu-set" causes dom0 crash or panic > > http://bugzilla.xen.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=1730 > > 3. [VT-D]fail to detach NIC from guest > > http://bugzilla.xen.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=1736 > > 4. Sometimes Xen panic on ia32pae Sandybridge when restore guest > > http://bugzilla.xen.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=1747 > > 5. [VT-D] device reset fail when create/destroy guest > > http://bugzilla.xen.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=1752 > > > > > > Thanks > > Zhou, Chao > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Xen-devel mailing list > > Xen-devel@lists.xen.org > > http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel > > _______________________________________________ > Xen-devel mailing list > Xen-devel@lists.xen.org > http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
> -----Original Message----- > From: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org > [mailto:xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org] On Behalf Of Konrad Rzeszutek > Wilk > Sent: Wednesday, March 14, 2012 12:55 AM > To: Zhou, Chao > Cc: xen-devel@lists.xensource.com > Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] VMX status report. Xen:24911 & Dom0: > d93dc5c4... > > On Tue, Mar 13, 2012 at 09:18:27AM +0000, Zhou, Chao wrote: > > Hi all, > > > > This is the test report of xen-unstable tree. We''ve switched our Dom0 to > upstream Linux 3.1-rc7 instead of Jeremy''s 2.6.32.x tree. > > Nice! Thanks for doing that. Thought some of the issues reported below I > think > are fixed in 3.3.. Especially the ''xl vcpu-set'' one - which I think is also > back-ported to the 3.x stable kernel. >As some our internal patches are based on 3.1-rc7, we use 3.1 as a base Dom0 for testing. We also tried most of these new bugs with 3.3 kernel, and found they still exist. As for the ''xl vcpu-set'' issue, upstream linux 3.3 also has the similar issue. I just gave some update for this on the bugzilla. You may have a look. http://bugzilla.xen.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=1730 -- Jay> > We''ve also upgraded our nightly test system from RHEL5.5 to RHEL6.2. > > We found four new issues and one old issue got fixed. > > > > Version Info > > > ===========================================================> ====> > xen-changeset: 24911:d7fe4cd831a0 > > Dom0: linux.git 3.1-rc7 (commit: d93dc5c4...) > > > ===========================================================> ====> > > > > > New issues(4) > > =============> > 1. when detaching a VF from hvm guest, "xl dmesg" will show some > warning information > > http://bugzilla.xen.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=1809 > > 2. Dom0 hang when bootup a guest with a VF(the guest has been bootup > with a different VF before) > > http://bugzilla.xen.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=1810 > > 3. RHEL6.2/6.1 guest runs quite slow > > http://bugzilla.xen.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=1811 > > 4. after detaching a VF from a guest, shutdown the guest is very slow > > http://bugzilla.xen.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=1812 > > > > Fixed issue(1) > > =============> > 1. Dom0 crash on power-off > > http://bugzilla.xen.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=1740 > > ----kernel3.1.0 doesn''t have this issue now > > > > Old issues(5) > > These old ones are with 3.1.x? > > =============> > 1. [ACPI] System cann''t resume after do suspend > > http://bugzilla.xen.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=1707 > > 2. [XL]"xl vcpu-set" causes dom0 crash or panic > > http://bugzilla.xen.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=1730 > > 3. [VT-D]fail to detach NIC from guest > > http://bugzilla.xen.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=1736 > > 4. Sometimes Xen panic on ia32pae Sandybridge when restore guest > > http://bugzilla.xen.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=1747 > > 5. [VT-D] device reset fail when create/destroy guest > > http://bugzilla.xen.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=1752 > > > > > > Thanks > > Zhou, Chao > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Xen-devel mailing list > > Xen-devel@lists.xen.org > > http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel > > _______________________________________________ > Xen-devel mailing list > Xen-devel@lists.xen.org > http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
Pasi Kärkkäinen
2012-Mar-14 11:21 UTC
Re: VMX status report. Xen:24911 & Dom0: d93dc5c4... Nested VMX testing?
On Wed, Mar 14, 2012 at 08:00:09AM +0000, Ren, Yongjie wrote:> > -----Original Message----- > > From: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org > > [mailto:xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org] On Behalf Of Pasi K?rkk?inen > > Sent: Tuesday, March 13, 2012 11:39 PM > > To: Zhou, Chao > > Cc: xen-devel@lists.xensource.com > > Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] VMX status report. Xen:24911 & Dom0: > > d93dc5c4... Nested VMX testing? > > > > On Tue, Mar 13, 2012 at 09:18:27AM +0000, Zhou, Chao wrote: > > > Hi all, > > > > > > > Hello, > > > > > This is the test report of xen-unstable tree. We''ve switched our Dom0 to > > upstream Linux 3.1-rc7 instead of Jeremy''s 2.6.32.x tree. > > > We''ve also upgraded our nightly test system from RHEL5.5 to RHEL6.2. > > > We found four new issues and one old issue got fixed. > > > > > > > Is Intel planning to start testing Nested VMX ? > > Yes, we''ve made several automated test cases for Nested VMX. >Great!> The bad news is there''s some bug on Nested VMX. > From my recent test, the following is the status for Nested VMX. > Xen on Xen: failed. L1 Xen guest can''t boot up. It hangs at the boot for xen hypervisor. > KVM on Xen: pass. L2 RHEL5.5 guest can boot up on L1 KVM guest. > (We use the same version of dom0 and xen-unstable as mentioned in the report.) > Intel will make more effort on Nested VMX bug fixing this year. >Ok, thanks for the results. I''m planning to test Nested VMX myself aswell in the near future.. -- Pasi> > > It seems AMD has done a lot of testing with Nested SVM with Xen.. > > > > Thanks, > > > > -- Pasi > > > > > > > Version Info > > > > > ===========================================================> > ====> > > xen-changeset: 24911:d7fe4cd831a0 > > > Dom0: linux.git 3.1-rc7 (commit: d93dc5c4...) > > > > > ===========================================================> > ====> > > > > > > > > New issues(4) > > > =============> > > 1. when detaching a VF from hvm guest, "xl dmesg" will show some > > warning information > > > http://bugzilla.xen.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=1809 > > > 2. Dom0 hang when bootup a guest with a VF(the guest has been bootup > > with a different VF before) > > > http://bugzilla.xen.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=1810 > > > 3. RHEL6.2/6.1 guest runs quite slow > > > http://bugzilla.xen.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=1811 > > > 4. after detaching a VF from a guest, shutdown the guest is very slow > > > http://bugzilla.xen.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=1812 > > > > > > Fixed issue(1) > > > =============> > > 1. Dom0 crash on power-off > > > http://bugzilla.xen.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=1740 > > > ----kernel3.1.0 doesn''t have this issue now > > > > > > Old issues(5) > > > =============> > > 1. [ACPI] System cann''t resume after do suspend > > > http://bugzilla.xen.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=1707 > > > 2. [XL]"xl vcpu-set" causes dom0 crash or panic > > > http://bugzilla.xen.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=1730 > > > 3. [VT-D]fail to detach NIC from guest > > > http://bugzilla.xen.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=1736 > > > 4. Sometimes Xen panic on ia32pae Sandybridge when restore guest > > > http://bugzilla.xen.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=1747 > > > 5. [VT-D] device reset fail when create/destroy guest > > > http://bugzilla.xen.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=1752 > > > > > > > > > Thanks > > > Zhou, Chao > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > Xen-devel mailing list > > > Xen-devel@lists.xen.org > > > http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Xen-devel mailing list > > Xen-devel@lists.xen.org > > http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk
2012-Mar-14 21:37 UTC
Re: VMX status report. Xen:24911 & Dom0: d93dc5c4...
On Wed, Mar 14, 2012 at 08:54:50AM +0000, Ren, Yongjie wrote:> > -----Original Message----- > > From: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org > > [mailto:xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org] On Behalf Of Konrad Rzeszutek > > Wilk > > Sent: Wednesday, March 14, 2012 12:55 AM > > To: Zhou, Chao > > Cc: xen-devel@lists.xensource.com > > Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] VMX status report. Xen:24911 & Dom0: > > d93dc5c4... > > > > On Tue, Mar 13, 2012 at 09:18:27AM +0000, Zhou, Chao wrote: > > > Hi all, > > > > > > This is the test report of xen-unstable tree. We''ve switched our Dom0 to > > upstream Linux 3.1-rc7 instead of Jeremy''s 2.6.32.x tree. > > > > Nice! Thanks for doing that. Thought some of the issues reported below I > > think > > are fixed in 3.3.. Especially the ''xl vcpu-set'' one - which I think is also > > back-ported to the 3.x stable kernel. > > > As some our internal patches are based on 3.1-rc7, we use 3.1 as a base Dom0 for testing. > We also tried most of these new bugs with 3.3 kernel, and found they still exist.which of the BZs below are against 3.3?> As for the ''xl vcpu-set'' issue, upstream linux 3.3 also has the similar issue. > I just gave some update for this on the bugzilla. You may have a look. > http://bugzilla.xen.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=1730OK, first of I am really excited that you guys are using the upstream kernel and testing against the latest. I think the issue I''ve seen before and it was due to a mix of vCPU hotplug code. If I booted the kernel with max_cpus=16 (on the Linux command line) and did those operations it worked. But it is a bug nonethless. Any ideas for a fix?> > -- Jay > > > > We''ve also upgraded our nightly test system from RHEL5.5 to RHEL6.2. > > > We found four new issues and one old issue got fixed. > > > > > > Version Info > > > > > ===========================================================> > ====> > > xen-changeset: 24911:d7fe4cd831a0 > > > Dom0: linux.git 3.1-rc7 (commit: d93dc5c4...) > > > > > ===========================================================> > ====> > > > > > > > > New issues(4) > > > =============> > > 1. when detaching a VF from hvm guest, "xl dmesg" will show some > > warning information > > > http://bugzilla.xen.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=1809 > > > 2. Dom0 hang when bootup a guest with a VF(the guest has been bootup > > with a different VF before) > > > http://bugzilla.xen.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=1810 > > > 3. RHEL6.2/6.1 guest runs quite slow > > > http://bugzilla.xen.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=1811 > > > 4. after detaching a VF from a guest, shutdown the guest is very slow > > > http://bugzilla.xen.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=1812 > > > > > > Fixed issue(1) > > > =============> > > 1. Dom0 crash on power-off > > > http://bugzilla.xen.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=1740 > > > ----kernel3.1.0 doesn''t have this issue now > > > > > > Old issues(5) > > > > These old ones are with 3.1.x? > > > =============> > > 1. [ACPI] System cann''t resume after do suspend > > > http://bugzilla.xen.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=1707 > > > 2. [XL]"xl vcpu-set" causes dom0 crash or panic > > > http://bugzilla.xen.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=1730 > > > 3. [VT-D]fail to detach NIC from guest > > > http://bugzilla.xen.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=1736 > > > 4. Sometimes Xen panic on ia32pae Sandybridge when restore guest > > > http://bugzilla.xen.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=1747 > > > 5. [VT-D] device reset fail when create/destroy guest > > > http://bugzilla.xen.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=1752 > > > > > > > > > Thanks > > > Zhou, Chao > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > Xen-devel mailing list > > > Xen-devel@lists.xen.org > > > http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Xen-devel mailing list > > Xen-devel@lists.xen.org > > http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
>>> On 14.03.12 at 07:08, "Ren, Yongjie" <yongjie.ren@intel.com> wrote: >> -----Original Message----- >> From: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org >> [mailto:xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org] On Behalf Of Jan Beulich >> Sent: Tuesday, March 13, 2012 7:34 PM >> To: Zhou, Chao >> Cc: xen-devel >> Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] VMX status report. Xen:24911 & Dom0: >> d93dc5c4... >> >> >>> On 13.03.12 at 10:18, "Zhou, Chao" <chao.zhou@intel.com> wrote: >> > 1. when detaching a VF from hvm guest, "xl dmesg" will show some >> warning >> > information >> > http://bugzilla.xen.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=1809 >> >> Could you give the qemu-traditional patch below a try (and report >> the resulting "xl dmesg" regardless of whether this eliminates the >> warning)? >> > Yes, we tried your below patch. The warning still exists. > Attached is the output of ''xl dmesg'' after detaching a VF.Okay, so this apparently is an ordering problem: unregister_real_device() -> pt_config_delete() -> pt_msix_delete() (frees [and fails to clear] ->msix) -> pt_unregister_regions() -> _pt_iomem_helper() (with the patch below) -> has_msix_mapping() (uses ->msix) As it is obviously necessary to call _pt_iomem_helper() (rather than xc_domain_memory_mapping() directly) from pt_unregister_regions(), it needs to be determined whether - the calls to pt_config_delete() and pt_unregister_regions() can be swapped, or - the calling of pt_msix_delete() (and for consistency also the freeing of ->msi) can be moved into or past the call to pt_unregister_regions(), or - yet something else can be done about this. Jan>> --- a/hw/pass-through.c >> +++ b/hw/pass-through.c >> @@ -1969,11 +1969,9 @@ static void pt_unregister_regions(struct >> if ( type == PCI_ADDRESS_SPACE_MEM || >> type == PCI_ADDRESS_SPACE_MEM_PREFETCH ) >> { >> - ret = xc_domain_memory_mapping(xc_handle, domid, >> - assigned_device->bases[i].e_physbase >> >> XC_PAGE_SHIFT, >> - assigned_device->bases[i].access.maddr >> >> XC_PAGE_SHIFT, >> - (e_size+XC_PAGE_SIZE-1) >> XC_PAGE_SHIFT, >> - DPCI_REMOVE_MAPPING); >> + ret = _pt_iomem_helper(assigned_device, i, >> + >> assigned_device->bases[i].e_physbase, >> + e_size, >> DPCI_REMOVE_MAPPING); >> if ( ret != 0 ) >> { >> PT_LOG("Error: remove old mem mapping failed!\n"); >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Xen-devel mailing list >> Xen-devel@lists.xen.org >> http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
Jan Beulich
2012-Mar-21 11:07 UTC
Ping: Re: VMX status report. Xen:24911 & Dom0: d93dc5c4...
>>> On 15.03.12 at 11:12, "Jan Beulich" <JBeulich@suse.com> wrote: >>>> On 14.03.12 at 07:08, "Ren, Yongjie" <yongjie.ren@intel.com> wrote: >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org >>> [mailto:xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org] On Behalf Of Jan Beulich >>> Sent: Tuesday, March 13, 2012 7:34 PM >>> To: Zhou, Chao >>> Cc: xen-devel >>> Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] VMX status report. Xen:24911 & Dom0: >>> d93dc5c4... >>> >>> >>> On 13.03.12 at 10:18, "Zhou, Chao" <chao.zhou@intel.com> wrote: >>> > 1. when detaching a VF from hvm guest, "xl dmesg" will show some >>> warning >>> > information >>> > http://bugzilla.xen.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=1809 >>> >>> Could you give the qemu-traditional patch below a try (and report >>> the resulting "xl dmesg" regardless of whether this eliminates the >>> warning)? >>> >> Yes, we tried your below patch. The warning still exists. >> Attached is the output of ''xl dmesg'' after detaching a VF. > > Okay, so this apparently is an ordering problem: > > unregister_real_device() > -> pt_config_delete() > -> pt_msix_delete() (frees [and fails to clear] ->msix) > -> pt_unregister_regions() > -> _pt_iomem_helper() (with the patch below) > -> has_msix_mapping() (uses ->msix) > > As it is obviously necessary to call _pt_iomem_helper() (rather than > xc_domain_memory_mapping() directly) from pt_unregister_regions(), > it needs to be determined whether > - the calls to pt_config_delete() and pt_unregister_regions() can be > swapped, or > - the calling of pt_msix_delete() (and for consistency also the freeing > of ->msi) can be moved into or past the call to > pt_unregister_regions(), or > - yet something else can be done about this.I''d really appreciate some advice here. Jan>>> --- a/hw/pass-through.c >>> +++ b/hw/pass-through.c >>> @@ -1969,11 +1969,9 @@ static void pt_unregister_regions(struct >>> if ( type == PCI_ADDRESS_SPACE_MEM || >>> type == PCI_ADDRESS_SPACE_MEM_PREFETCH ) >>> { >>> - ret = xc_domain_memory_mapping(xc_handle, domid, >>> - assigned_device->bases[i].e_physbase >> >>> XC_PAGE_SHIFT, >>> - assigned_device->bases[i].access.maddr >> >>> XC_PAGE_SHIFT, >>> - (e_size+XC_PAGE_SIZE-1) >> XC_PAGE_SHIFT, >>> - DPCI_REMOVE_MAPPING); >>> + ret = _pt_iomem_helper(assigned_device, i, >>> + >>> assigned_device->bases[i].e_physbase, >>> + e_size, >>> DPCI_REMOVE_MAPPING); >>> if ( ret != 0 ) >>> { >>> PT_LOG("Error: remove old mem mapping failed!\n"); >>> >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Xen-devel mailing list >>> Xen-devel@lists.xen.org >>> http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
Stefano Stabellini
2012-Mar-22 10:59 UTC
Re: Ping: Re: VMX status report. Xen:24911 & Dom0: d93dc5c4...
On Wed, 21 Mar 2012, Jan Beulich wrote:> >>> On 15.03.12 at 11:12, "Jan Beulich" <JBeulich@suse.com> wrote: > >>>> On 14.03.12 at 07:08, "Ren, Yongjie" <yongjie.ren@intel.com> wrote: > >>> -----Original Message----- > >>> From: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org > >>> [mailto:xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org] On Behalf Of Jan Beulich > >>> Sent: Tuesday, March 13, 2012 7:34 PM > >>> To: Zhou, Chao > >>> Cc: xen-devel > >>> Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] VMX status report. Xen:24911 & Dom0: > >>> d93dc5c4... > >>> > >>> >>> On 13.03.12 at 10:18, "Zhou, Chao" <chao.zhou@intel.com> wrote: > >>> > 1. when detaching a VF from hvm guest, "xl dmesg" will show some > >>> warning > >>> > information > >>> > http://bugzilla.xen.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=1809 > >>> > >>> Could you give the qemu-traditional patch below a try (and report > >>> the resulting "xl dmesg" regardless of whether this eliminates the > >>> warning)? > >>> > >> Yes, we tried your below patch. The warning still exists. > >> Attached is the output of ''xl dmesg'' after detaching a VF. > > > > Okay, so this apparently is an ordering problem: > > > > unregister_real_device() > > -> pt_config_delete() > > -> pt_msix_delete() (frees [and fails to clear] ->msix) > > -> pt_unregister_regions() > > -> _pt_iomem_helper() (with the patch below) > > -> has_msix_mapping() (uses ->msix) > > > > As it is obviously necessary to call _pt_iomem_helper() (rather than > > xc_domain_memory_mapping() directly) from pt_unregister_regions(), > > it needs to be determined whether > > - the calls to pt_config_delete() and pt_unregister_regions() can be > > swapped, or > > - the calling of pt_msix_delete() (and for consistency also the freeing > > of ->msi) can be moved into or past the call to > > pt_unregister_regions(), or > > - yet something else can be done about this. > > I''d really appreciate some advice here.It seems to me that pt_unregister_regions and pt_config_delete could be swapped without unwanted side effects
>>> On 14.03.12 at 07:08, "Ren, Yongjie" <yongjie.ren@intel.com> wrote: >> -----Original Message----- >> From: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org >> [mailto:xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org] On Behalf Of Jan Beulich >> Sent: Tuesday, March 13, 2012 7:34 PM >> To: Zhou, Chao >> Cc: xen-devel >> Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] VMX status report. Xen:24911 & Dom0: >> d93dc5c4... >> >> >>> On 13.03.12 at 10:18, "Zhou, Chao" <chao.zhou@intel.com> wrote: >> > 1. when detaching a VF from hvm guest, "xl dmesg" will show some >> warning >> > information >> > http://bugzilla.xen.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=1809 >> >> Could you give the qemu-traditional patch below a try (and report >> the resulting "xl dmesg" regardless of whether this eliminates the >> warning)? >> > Yes, we tried your below patch. The warning still exists. > Attached is the output of ''xl dmesg'' after detaching a VF.Okay, attached a second try (incorporating Stefano''s feedback). Jan _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xen.org http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
> -----Original Message----- > From: Jan Beulich [mailto:JBeulich@suse.com] > Sent: Friday, March 23, 2012 5:34 PM > To: Zhou, Chao; Ren, Yongjie > Cc: xen-devel > Subject: RE: [Xen-devel] VMX status report. Xen:24911 & Dom0: > d93dc5c4... > > >>> On 14.03.12 at 07:08, "Ren, Yongjie" <yongjie.ren@intel.com> wrote: > >> -----Original Message----- > >> From: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org > >> [mailto:xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org] On Behalf Of Jan Beulich > >> Sent: Tuesday, March 13, 2012 7:34 PM > >> To: Zhou, Chao > >> Cc: xen-devel > >> Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] VMX status report. Xen:24911 & Dom0: > >> d93dc5c4... > >> > >> >>> On 13.03.12 at 10:18, "Zhou, Chao" <chao.zhou@intel.com> > wrote: > >> > 1. when detaching a VF from hvm guest, "xl dmesg" will show some > >> warning > >> > information > >> > http://bugzilla.xen.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=1809 > >> > >> Could you give the qemu-traditional patch below a try (and report > >> the resulting "xl dmesg" regardless of whether this eliminates the > >> warning)? > >> > > Yes, we tried your below patch. The warning still exists. > > Attached is the output of ''xl dmesg'' after detaching a VF. > > Okay, attached a second try (incorporating Stefano''s feedback). >Yes. This version patch will fix the warning (BZ#1809) I reported. Attached the output of ''xl dmesg''. -Jay _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xen.org http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
Pasi Kärkkäinen
2012-Jun-19 20:44 UTC
Re: VMX status report. Xen:24911 & Dom0: d93dc5c4... Nested VMX testing?
On Wed, Mar 14, 2012 at 08:00:09AM +0000, Ren, Yongjie wrote:> > > > Hello, > > > > > This is the test report of xen-unstable tree. We''ve switched our Dom0 to > > upstream Linux 3.1-rc7 instead of Jeremy''s 2.6.32.x tree. > > > We''ve also upgraded our nightly test system from RHEL5.5 to RHEL6.2. > > > We found four new issues and one old issue got fixed. > > > > > > > Is Intel planning to start testing Nested VMX ? > > Yes, we''ve made several automated test cases for Nested VMX. > The bad news is there''s some bug on Nested VMX. > From my recent test, the following is the status for Nested VMX. > Xen on Xen: failed. L1 Xen guest can''t boot up. It hangs at the boot for xen hypervisor. > KVM on Xen: pass. L2 RHEL5.5 guest can boot up on L1 KVM guest. > (We use the same version of dom0 and xen-unstable as mentioned in the report.) > Intel will make more effort on Nested VMX bug fixing this year. >Hello again, I''m wondering.. Does Intel have plans to do more Nested VMX testing (and bugfixes) before Xen 4.2 release? There''s an action point on the Xen 4.2 status email about describing the status of Nested VMX support.> > > It seems AMD has done a lot of testing with Nested SVM with Xen.. > >Thanks, -- Pasi
Ren, Yongjie
2012-Jun-20 05:46 UTC
Re: VMX status report. Xen:24911 & Dom0: d93dc5c4... Nested VMX testing?
> -----Original Message----- > From: Pasi Kärkkäinen [mailto:pasik@iki.fi] > Sent: Wednesday, June 20, 2012 4:44 AM > To: Ren, Yongjie > Cc: Zhou, Chao; xen-devel@lists.xensource.com > Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] VMX status report. Xen:24911 & Dom0: > d93dc5c4... Nested VMX testing? > > On Wed, Mar 14, 2012 at 08:00:09AM +0000, Ren, Yongjie wrote: > > > > > > Hello, > > > > > > > This is the test report of xen-unstable tree. We''ve switched our Dom0 > to > > > upstream Linux 3.1-rc7 instead of Jeremy''s 2.6.32.x tree. > > > > We''ve also upgraded our nightly test system from RHEL5.5 to > RHEL6.2. > > > > We found four new issues and one old issue got fixed. > > > > > > > > > > Is Intel planning to start testing Nested VMX ? > > > > Yes, we''ve made several automated test cases for Nested VMX. > > The bad news is there''s some bug on Nested VMX. > > From my recent test, the following is the status for Nested VMX. > > Xen on Xen: failed. L1 Xen guest can''t boot up. It hangs at the boot > for xen hypervisor. > > KVM on Xen: pass. L2 RHEL5.5 guest can boot up on L1 KVM guest. > > (We use the same version of dom0 and xen-unstable as mentioned in the > report.) > > Intel will make more effort on Nested VMX bug fixing this year. > > > > Hello again, > > I''m wondering.. Does Intel have plans to do more Nested VMX testing (and > bugfixes) before Xen 4.2 release? > There''s an action point on the Xen 4.2 status email about describing the > status of Nested VMX support. >Hum, we don''t have specific plan or bug fixes on Nested VMX before 4.2 release. But we have an engineer who is looking at this issue now. And we also test nested vmx biweekly. The status is the same as I described before. Xen on Xen: failed. L1 guest can''t boot up. KVM on Xen: good.> > > > > > It seems AMD has done a lot of testing with Nested SVM with Xen.. > > > > > > Thanks, > > -- Pasi