linux-kernel - Re: [Xen-devel] Re: [PATCH RFC] x86/acpi: don't ignore I/O APICs justbecause there's no local APIC

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <86802c440906192058v78746acft161d74720c01a6a7@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Fri, 19 Jun 2009 20:58:24 -0700
From:	Yinghai Lu <yhlu.kernel@...il.com>
To:	"Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>
Cc:	Jan Beulich <JBeulich@...ell.com>,
	Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@...p.org>,
	Len Brown <lenb@...nel.org>,
	"the arch/x86 maintainers" <x86@...nel.org>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	Xen-devel <xen-devel@...ts.xensource.com>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] Re: [PATCH RFC] x86/acpi: don't ignore I/O APICs 
	justbecause there's no local APIC

On Fri, Jun 19, 2009 at 1:16 AM, Eric W. Biederman<ebiederm@...ssion.com> wrote:
> "Jan Beulich" <JBeulich@...ell.com> writes:
>
>>>>> Yinghai Lu <yhlu.kernel@...il.com> 19.06.09 07:32 >>>
>>>doesn't XEN support per cpu irq vector?
>>
>> No.
>>
>>>got sth from XEN 3.3 / SLES 11
>>>
>>>igb 0000:81:00.0: PCI INT A -> GSI 95 (level, low) -> IRQ 95
>>>igb 0000:81:00.0: setting latency timer to 64
>>>igb 0000:81:00.0: Intel(R) Gigabit Ethernet Network Connection
>>>igb 0000:81:00.0: eth9: (PCIe:2.5Gb/s:Width x4) 00:21:28:3a:d8:0e
>>>igb 0000:81:00.0: eth9: PBA No: ffffff-0ff
>>>igb 0000:81:00.0: Using MSI-X interrupts. 4 rx queue(s), 4 tx queue(s)
>>>vendor=8086 device=3420
>>>(XEN) irq.c:847: dom0: invalid pirq 94 or vector -28
>>>igb 0000:81:00.1: PCI INT B -> GSI 94 (level, low) -> IRQ 94
>>>igb 0000:81:00.1: setting latency timer to 64
>>>(XEN) physdev.c:87: dom0: map irq with wrong vector -28
>>>map irq failed
>>>(XEN) physdev.c:87: dom0: map irq with wrong vector -28
>>>map irq failed
>>>
>>>the system need a lot of MSI-X normally.. with current mainline tree
>>>kernel, it will need about 360 irq...
>>
>> Do you mean 360 connected devices, or just 360 IO-APIC pins (most of
>> which are usually unused)? In the latter case, devices using MSI (i.e. not
>> using high numbered IO-APIC pins) should work, while devices connected
>> to IO-APIC pins numbered 256 and higher won't work in SLE11 as-is.
>> This limitation got fixed recently in the 3.5-unstable tree, though. The
>> 256 active vectors limit, however, continues to exist, so the former case
>> would still not be supported by Xen.

5 io-apic controllers, so total pins like 5x24

>
> Good question.  I know YH had a system a few years ago that exceeded 256 vectors.
that was in SimNow.

This time is real.
think about system: 24 pcie cards and every one has two functions. and
one function will use 16 or 20 MSIX
like 24 * 2 * 16

YH
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/