Re: Issue about domU missing interrupt

Sander Eikelenboom
Wed, 05 Dec 2012 12:02:22 -0000

Wednesday, December 5, 2012, 12:51:13 PM, you wrote:

> On Tue, 4 Dec 2012, Sander Eikelenboom wrote:
>> Tuesday, December 4, 2012, 12:01:05 PM, you wrote:
>>
>> > On Tue, Dec 04, 2012 at 10:15:58AM +0000, Jan Beulich wrote:
>> >> >>> On 04.12.12 at 04:07, "G.R."
<firemeteor@users.sourceforge.net> wrote:
>> >> >>  I had a quick look, and it doesn''t look
that hard to backport that patch.
>> >> >
>> >> > Thanks, Mat.
>> >> > I''m glad to report that the patch do fix my
problem.
>> >> >
>> >> > And yest it is really easy to port since the code did not
change across the
>> >> > two release.
>> >> > The only change would be line numbers (3841 vs 3803) and
one extra comments
>> >> > before this line:
>> >> >
>> >> >  static int pt_msix_update_one(struct pt_dev *dev, int
entry_nr)
>> >> >
>> >> > I''m not sure if you are going to release another
maintenance version that
>> >> > include this patch,
>> >> > but I''ll report this to Debain maintainer since
it''s about to freeze for
>> >> > v7.0 release and v4.2.0 will not make it.
>> >>
>> >> Any thoughts on backporting this to 4.1.x, now or after 4.1.4
is
>> >> out?
>> >>
>>
>> > It''s already in Xen 4.2, it''s confirmed to fix a
bug in Xen 4.1,
>> > so I''d say it should be a candidate for Xen 4.1.4.
>>
>> Just tried switching the device model to "qemu-xen", seems
this one isn''t upstream either.
>> (XEN) [2012-12-04 22:49:25] vmsi.c:108:d32767 Unsupported delivery mode
3
>>
>> Running xen-unstable as of today, with device-model
"qemu-xen" for this hvm guest.
>>

> The patch is supposed to fix a bug affecting msi_translate but in
> upstream QEMU we haven''t implemented msi_translate at all! So in
this
> case the cause of the bug (and as a consequence the fix) must be a
> different one.

Ok will see if i can find out what is going on. Probably have to force
msi_translate=0.

I noticed "qemu-xen" doesn''t make a log file in /var/log/xen
as "qemu-dm" does, is this expected ?


>> Sander
>>
>> > -- Pasi
>>
>> >> Jan
>> >>
>> >> > On Mon, Dec 3, 2012 at 9:58 PM, Mats Petersson
>> >> > <mats.petersson@citrix.com>wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> >> On 03/12/12 13:19, Mats Petersson wrote:
>> >> >>
>> >> >>> On 03/12/12 13:14, G.R. wrote:
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>>> On Mon, Dec 3, 2012 at 6:15 PM, Mats
Petersson
>> >> >>>> <mats.petersson@citrix.com
>> >> >
<mailto:mats.petersson@citrix.**com<mats.petersson@citrix.com>>>
>> >> >>>> wrote:
>> >> >>>>
>> >> >>>>      On 03/12/12 03:47, G.R. wrote:
>> >> >>>>
>> >> >>>>          Hi developers,
>> >> >>>>          I met some domU issues and the log
suggests missing interrupt.
>> >> >>>>          Details from here:
>> >> >>>>
http://www.gossamer-threads.**com/lists/xen/users/263938#**
>> >> >>>> 263938
<http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/xen/users/263938#263938>
>> >> >>>>          In summary, this is the suspicious
log:
>> >> >>>>
>> >> >>>>          (XEN) vmsi.c:122:d32767 Unsupported
delivery mode 3
>> >> >>>>
>> >> >>>>          I''ve checked the code in
question and found that mode 3 is an
>> >> >>>>          ''reserved_1'' mode.
>> >> >>>>          I want to trace down the source of
this mode setting to
>> >> >>>>          root-cause the issue.
>> >> >>>>          But I''m not an xen
developer, and am even a newbie as a xen
>> >> >>>> user.
>> >> >>>>          Could anybody give me instructions
about how to enable
>> >> >>>>          detailed debug log?
>> >> >>>>          It could be better if I can get
advice about experiments to
>> >> >>>>          perform / switches to try out etc.
>> >> >>>>
>> >> >>>>          My SW config:
>> >> >>>>          dom0: Debian wheezy (3.6
experimental kernel, xen 4.1.3-4)
>> >> >>>>          domU: Debian wheezy 3.2.x stock
kernel.
>> >> >>>>
>> >> >>>>          Thanks,
>> >> >>>>          Timothy
>> >> >>>>
>> >> >>>>      Are you passing hardware (PCI
Passthrough) to the HVM guest?
>> >> >>>>      What are the exact messages in the DomU?
>> >> >>>>
>> >> >>>>
>> >> >>>> Yes, I''m doing PCI passthrough (the
IGD, audio && USB controller).
>> >> >>>> But this is actually a PVHVM guest since
debian stock kernel has PVOP
>> >> >>>> enabled.
>> >> >>>> And when I tried another PVOP disabled linux
distro (openelec v2.0), I
>> >> >>>> did not see such msi related error message.
>> >> >>>> Actually, with that domU I do not see
anything obvious wrong from the
>> >> >>>> log, but I also see nothing from panel (panel
receive no signal and go
>> >> >>>> power-saving) :-(
>> >> >>>>
>> >> >>>>
>> >> >>>> Back to the issue I was reporting, the domU
log looks like this:
>> >> >>>>
>> >> >>>> Dec 2 21:52:44 debvm kernel: [ 1085.604071]
>> >> >>>> [drm:i915_hangcheck_ring_idle]
>> >> >>>> *ERROR* Hangcheck timer elapsed... blt ring
idle [waiting on 3354, at
>> >> >>>> 3354], missed IRQ?
>> >> >>>> Dec 2 21:56:50 debvm kernel: [ 1332.076071]
>> >> >>>> [drm:i915_hangcheck_ring_idle]
>> >> >>>> *ERROR* Hangcheck timer elapsed... render
ring idle [waiting on 11297, at
>> >> >>>> 11297], missed IRQ?
>> >> >>>> Dec 2 22:32:48 debvm kernel: [ 7.220073]
hda-intel: azx_get_response
>> >> >>>> timeout, switching to polling mode: last
cmd=0x000f0000
>> >> >>>> Dec 2 22:45:32 debvm kernel: [ 776.392084]
hda-intel: No response from
>> >> >>>> codec, disabling MSI: last cmd=0x002f0600
>> >> >>>> Dec 2 22:45:33 debvm kernel: [ 777.400075]
hda_intel: azx_get_response
>> >> >>>> timeout, switching to single_cmd mode: last
cmd=0x002f0600
>> >> >>>>
>> >> >>>>
>> >> >>>> Thanks,
>> >> >>>> Timothy
>> >> >>>>
>> >> >>> It does sound like there is a fix in 4.2.0, as
indicated by Jan, that
>> >> >>> fixes this. I''m not fully clued up to
what the policy for backporting
>> >> >>> fixes are, and I haven''t looked at the
complexity of the fix itself, but
>> >> >>> either updating to the 4.2.0 or a (personal)
backport sounds like the
>> >> >>> right solution here.
>> >> >>>
>> >> >> I had a quick look, and it doesn''t look that
hard to backport that patch.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> --
>> >> >> Mats
>> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >> >>> Unfortunately, I hadn''t seen
Jan''s reply by the time I wrote my response
>> >> >>> to your original email.
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>> --
>> >> >>> Mats
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>> ______________________________**_________________
>> >> >>> 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
>> >> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> _______________________________________________
>> >> Xen-devel mailing list
>> >> Xen-devel@lists.xen.org
>> >> http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
>>
>>
>>