On Wed, Sep 26, 2012 at 04:04:03PM -0600, Alex Williamson wrote:
> Here's a lockdep clean version of it:
>
> amd_iommu: Handle aliases not backed by devices
>
> Aliases sometimes don't have a struct pci_dev backing them. This breaks
> our attempt to figure out the topology and device quirks
On Wed, Sep 26, 2012 at 04:04:03PM -0600, Alex Williamson wrote:
Here's a lockdep clean version of it:
amd_iommu: Handle aliases not backed by devices
Aliases sometimes don't have a struct pci_dev backing them. This breaks
our attempt to figure out the topology and device quirks that may
Am Wed, 26 Sep 2012 16:04:03 -0600
schrieb Alex Williamson :
> On Wed, 2012-09-26 at 13:50 -0600, Alex Williamson wrote:
> > On Wed, 2012-09-26 at 10:21 -0600, Alex Williamson wrote:
> > > On Wed, 2012-09-26 at 17:10 +0200, Roedel, Joerg wrote:
> > > > On Wed, Sep 26, 2012 at 08:35:59AM -0600,
Am Wed, 26 Sep 2012 16:04:03 -0600
schrieb Alex Williamson alex.william...@redhat.com:
On Wed, 2012-09-26 at 13:50 -0600, Alex Williamson wrote:
On Wed, 2012-09-26 at 10:21 -0600, Alex Williamson wrote:
On Wed, 2012-09-26 at 17:10 +0200, Roedel, Joerg wrote:
On Wed, Sep 26, 2012 at
On Wed, 2012-09-26 at 13:50 -0600, Alex Williamson wrote:
> On Wed, 2012-09-26 at 10:21 -0600, Alex Williamson wrote:
> > On Wed, 2012-09-26 at 17:10 +0200, Roedel, Joerg wrote:
> > > On Wed, Sep 26, 2012 at 08:35:59AM -0600, Alex Williamson wrote:
> > > > Hmm, that throws a kink in iommu groups.
On Wed, 2012-09-26 at 10:21 -0600, Alex Williamson wrote:
> On Wed, 2012-09-26 at 17:10 +0200, Roedel, Joerg wrote:
> > On Wed, Sep 26, 2012 at 08:35:59AM -0600, Alex Williamson wrote:
> > > Hmm, that throws a kink in iommu groups. So perhaps we need to make an
> > > alias interface to iommu
Am Wed, 26 Sep 2012 17:04:07 +0200
schrieb "Roedel, Joerg" :
> On Wed, Sep 26, 2012 at 08:52:01AM -0600, Alex Williamson wrote:
> > Assuming this works, it may be ok as a 3.7 fix, but if there was
> > actually more than one device behind the alias we'd expose them as
> > separate iommu groups. I
Am Wed, 26 Sep 2012 17:04:07 +0200
schrieb "Roedel, Joerg" :
> On Wed, Sep 26, 2012 at 08:52:01AM -0600, Alex Williamson wrote:
> > Assuming this works, it may be ok as a 3.7 fix, but if there was
> > actually more than one device behind the alias we'd expose them as
> > separate iommu groups. I
On Wed, 2012-09-26 at 17:10 +0200, Roedel, Joerg wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 26, 2012 at 08:35:59AM -0600, Alex Williamson wrote:
> > Hmm, that throws a kink in iommu groups. So perhaps we need to make an
> > alias interface to iommu groups. Seems like this could just be an extra
> > parameter to
On Wed, 2012-09-26 at 17:04 +0200, Roedel, Joerg wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 26, 2012 at 08:52:01AM -0600, Alex Williamson wrote:
> > Assuming this works, it may be ok as a 3.7 fix, but if there was
> > actually more than one device behind the alias we'd expose them as
> > separate iommu groups. I don't
On Wed, Sep 26, 2012 at 08:35:59AM -0600, Alex Williamson wrote:
> Hmm, that throws a kink in iommu groups. So perhaps we need to make an
> alias interface to iommu groups. Seems like this could just be an extra
> parameter to iommu_group_get and iommu_group_add_device (empty in the
> typical
On Wed, Sep 26, 2012 at 08:52:01AM -0600, Alex Williamson wrote:
> Assuming this works, it may be ok as a 3.7 fix, but if there was
> actually more than one device behind the alias we'd expose them as
> separate iommu groups. I don't think that's what we want. Maybe it
> should at least get a
On Wed, 2012-09-26 at 16:43 +0200, Roedel, Joerg wrote:
> Florian,
>
> On Wed, Sep 26, 2012 at 01:01:54AM +0200, Florian Dazinger wrote:
> > you're right, either "amd_iommu=off" or removing the audio card makes
> > the failure disappear. I will test the new BIOS rev. tomorrow.
>
> Can you please
Florian,
On Wed, Sep 26, 2012 at 01:01:54AM +0200, Florian Dazinger wrote:
> you're right, either "amd_iommu=off" or removing the audio card makes
> the failure disappear. I will test the new BIOS rev. tomorrow.
Can you please test this diff and report if it fixes the problem for
you?
Thanks.
On Wed, 2012-09-26 at 15:20 +0200, Roedel, Joerg wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 25, 2012 at 01:43:46PM -0600, Alex Williamson wrote:
> > Joerg, any thoughts on a quirk for this? Unfortunately we can't just
> > skip IOMMU groups when an alias is broken because it puts the other
> > IOMMU groups at risk that
On Tue, Sep 25, 2012 at 01:43:46PM -0600, Alex Williamson wrote:
> Joerg, any thoughts on a quirk for this? Unfortunately we can't just
> skip IOMMU groups when an alias is broken because it puts the other
> IOMMU groups at risk that might not actually be isolated from this
> device. It looks
On Tue, Sep 25, 2012 at 01:43:46PM -0600, Alex Williamson wrote:
Joerg, any thoughts on a quirk for this? Unfortunately we can't just
skip IOMMU groups when an alias is broken because it puts the other
IOMMU groups at risk that might not actually be isolated from this
device. It looks like
On Wed, 2012-09-26 at 15:20 +0200, Roedel, Joerg wrote:
On Tue, Sep 25, 2012 at 01:43:46PM -0600, Alex Williamson wrote:
Joerg, any thoughts on a quirk for this? Unfortunately we can't just
skip IOMMU groups when an alias is broken because it puts the other
IOMMU groups at risk that might
Florian,
On Wed, Sep 26, 2012 at 01:01:54AM +0200, Florian Dazinger wrote:
you're right, either amd_iommu=off or removing the audio card makes
the failure disappear. I will test the new BIOS rev. tomorrow.
Can you please test this diff and report if it fixes the problem for
you?
Thanks.
diff
On Wed, 2012-09-26 at 16:43 +0200, Roedel, Joerg wrote:
Florian,
On Wed, Sep 26, 2012 at 01:01:54AM +0200, Florian Dazinger wrote:
you're right, either amd_iommu=off or removing the audio card makes
the failure disappear. I will test the new BIOS rev. tomorrow.
Can you please test this
On Wed, Sep 26, 2012 at 08:52:01AM -0600, Alex Williamson wrote:
Assuming this works, it may be ok as a 3.7 fix, but if there was
actually more than one device behind the alias we'd expose them as
separate iommu groups. I don't think that's what we want. Maybe it
should at least get a
On Wed, Sep 26, 2012 at 08:35:59AM -0600, Alex Williamson wrote:
Hmm, that throws a kink in iommu groups. So perhaps we need to make an
alias interface to iommu groups. Seems like this could just be an extra
parameter to iommu_group_get and iommu_group_add_device (empty in the
typical case).
On Wed, 2012-09-26 at 17:04 +0200, Roedel, Joerg wrote:
On Wed, Sep 26, 2012 at 08:52:01AM -0600, Alex Williamson wrote:
Assuming this works, it may be ok as a 3.7 fix, but if there was
actually more than one device behind the alias we'd expose them as
separate iommu groups. I don't think
On Wed, 2012-09-26 at 17:10 +0200, Roedel, Joerg wrote:
On Wed, Sep 26, 2012 at 08:35:59AM -0600, Alex Williamson wrote:
Hmm, that throws a kink in iommu groups. So perhaps we need to make an
alias interface to iommu groups. Seems like this could just be an extra
parameter to
Am Wed, 26 Sep 2012 17:04:07 +0200
schrieb Roedel, Joerg joerg.roe...@amd.com:
On Wed, Sep 26, 2012 at 08:52:01AM -0600, Alex Williamson wrote:
Assuming this works, it may be ok as a 3.7 fix, but if there was
actually more than one device behind the alias we'd expose them as
separate iommu
Am Wed, 26 Sep 2012 17:04:07 +0200
schrieb Roedel, Joerg joerg.roe...@amd.com:
On Wed, Sep 26, 2012 at 08:52:01AM -0600, Alex Williamson wrote:
Assuming this works, it may be ok as a 3.7 fix, but if there was
actually more than one device behind the alias we'd expose them as
separate iommu
On Wed, 2012-09-26 at 10:21 -0600, Alex Williamson wrote:
On Wed, 2012-09-26 at 17:10 +0200, Roedel, Joerg wrote:
On Wed, Sep 26, 2012 at 08:35:59AM -0600, Alex Williamson wrote:
Hmm, that throws a kink in iommu groups. So perhaps we need to make an
alias interface to iommu groups.
On Wed, 2012-09-26 at 13:50 -0600, Alex Williamson wrote:
On Wed, 2012-09-26 at 10:21 -0600, Alex Williamson wrote:
On Wed, 2012-09-26 at 17:10 +0200, Roedel, Joerg wrote:
On Wed, Sep 26, 2012 at 08:35:59AM -0600, Alex Williamson wrote:
Hmm, that throws a kink in iommu groups. So
On Wed, 2012-09-26 at 01:01 +0200, Florian Dazinger wrote:
> Am Tue, 25 Sep 2012 13:43:46 -0600
> schrieb Alex Williamson :
>
> > On Tue, 2012-09-25 at 20:54 +0200, Florian Dazinger wrote:
> > > Am Tue, 25 Sep 2012 12:32:50 -0600
> > > schrieb Alex Williamson :
> > >
> > > > On Mon, 2012-09-24
Am Tue, 25 Sep 2012 13:43:46 -0600
schrieb Alex Williamson :
> On Tue, 2012-09-25 at 20:54 +0200, Florian Dazinger wrote:
> > Am Tue, 25 Sep 2012 12:32:50 -0600
> > schrieb Alex Williamson :
> >
> > > On Mon, 2012-09-24 at 21:03 +0200, Florian Dazinger wrote:
> > > > Hi,
> > > > I think I've
On Tue, 2012-09-25 at 20:54 +0200, Florian Dazinger wrote:
> Am Tue, 25 Sep 2012 12:32:50 -0600
> schrieb Alex Williamson :
>
> > On Mon, 2012-09-24 at 21:03 +0200, Florian Dazinger wrote:
> > > Hi,
> > > I think I've found a regression, which causes an early boot crash, I
> > > appended the
On Tue, 2012-09-25 at 12:32 -0600, Alex Williamson wrote:
> On Mon, 2012-09-24 at 21:03 +0200, Florian Dazinger wrote:
> > Hi,
> > I think I've found a regression, which causes an early boot crash, I
> > appended the kernel output via jpg file, since I do not have a serial
> > console or sth.
> >
On Mon, 2012-09-24 at 21:03 +0200, Florian Dazinger wrote:
> Hi,
> I think I've found a regression, which causes an early boot crash, I
> appended the kernel output via jpg file, since I do not have a serial
> console or sth.
>
> after bisection, it boils down to this commit:
>
>
On Mon, 2012-09-24 at 21:03 +0200, Florian Dazinger wrote:
Hi,
I think I've found a regression, which causes an early boot crash, I
appended the kernel output via jpg file, since I do not have a serial
console or sth.
after bisection, it boils down to this commit:
On Tue, 2012-09-25 at 12:32 -0600, Alex Williamson wrote:
On Mon, 2012-09-24 at 21:03 +0200, Florian Dazinger wrote:
Hi,
I think I've found a regression, which causes an early boot crash, I
appended the kernel output via jpg file, since I do not have a serial
console or sth.
after
On Tue, 2012-09-25 at 20:54 +0200, Florian Dazinger wrote:
Am Tue, 25 Sep 2012 12:32:50 -0600
schrieb Alex Williamson alex.william...@redhat.com:
On Mon, 2012-09-24 at 21:03 +0200, Florian Dazinger wrote:
Hi,
I think I've found a regression, which causes an early boot crash, I
Am Tue, 25 Sep 2012 13:43:46 -0600
schrieb Alex Williamson alex.william...@redhat.com:
On Tue, 2012-09-25 at 20:54 +0200, Florian Dazinger wrote:
Am Tue, 25 Sep 2012 12:32:50 -0600
schrieb Alex Williamson alex.william...@redhat.com:
On Mon, 2012-09-24 at 21:03 +0200, Florian Dazinger
On Wed, 2012-09-26 at 01:01 +0200, Florian Dazinger wrote:
Am Tue, 25 Sep 2012 13:43:46 -0600
schrieb Alex Williamson alex.william...@redhat.com:
On Tue, 2012-09-25 at 20:54 +0200, Florian Dazinger wrote:
Am Tue, 25 Sep 2012 12:32:50 -0600
schrieb Alex Williamson
38 matches
Mail list logo
