Re: Xen regression, Was: [PATCH] x86/irq: Probe for PIC presence before allocating descs for legacy IRQs

On 04/14/2016 09:45 AM, David Vrabel wrote: On 12/04/16 19:06, Stefano Stabellini wrote: On Tue, 12 Apr 2016, Boris Ostrovsky wrote: On 04/11/2016 10:08 PM, Stefano Stabellini wrote: Hi all, Unfortunately this patch (now commit 8c058b0b9c34d8c8d7912880956543769323e2d8) causes a regression on

Re: Xen regression, Was: [PATCH] x86/irq: Probe for PIC presence before allocating descs for legacy IRQs

On 04/14/2016 09:45 AM, David Vrabel wrote: On 12/04/16 19:06, Stefano Stabellini wrote: On Tue, 12 Apr 2016, Boris Ostrovsky wrote: On 04/11/2016 10:08 PM, Stefano Stabellini wrote: Hi all, Unfortunately this patch (now commit 8c058b0b9c34d8c8d7912880956543769323e2d8) causes a regression on

Re: Xen regression, Was: [PATCH] x86/irq: Probe for PIC presence before allocating descs for legacy IRQs

On 12/04/16 19:06, Stefano Stabellini wrote: > On Tue, 12 Apr 2016, Boris Ostrovsky wrote: >> On 04/11/2016 10:08 PM, Stefano Stabellini wrote: >>> Hi all, >>> >>> Unfortunately this patch (now commit >>> 8c058b0b9c34d8c8d7912880956543769323e2d8) causes a regression on Xen >>> when running on top

Re: Xen regression, Was: [PATCH] x86/irq: Probe for PIC presence before allocating descs for legacy IRQs

On 12/04/16 19:06, Stefano Stabellini wrote: > On Tue, 12 Apr 2016, Boris Ostrovsky wrote: >> On 04/11/2016 10:08 PM, Stefano Stabellini wrote: >>> Hi all, >>> >>> Unfortunately this patch (now commit >>> 8c058b0b9c34d8c8d7912880956543769323e2d8) causes a regression on Xen >>> when running on top

Re: Xen regression, Was: [PATCH] x86/irq: Probe for PIC presence before allocating descs for legacy IRQs

On 04/13/2016 06:38 PM, Stefano Stabellini wrote: On Wed, 13 Apr 2016, Boris Ostrovsky wrote: On 04/13/2016 01:36 PM, Boris Ostrovsky wrote: On 04/12/2016 09:27 PM, Boris Ostrovsky wrote: On 04/12/2016 07:15 PM, Stefano Stabellini wrote: On Tue, 12 Apr 2016, Boris Ostrovsky wrote: On

Re: Xen regression, Was: [PATCH] x86/irq: Probe for PIC presence before allocating descs for legacy IRQs

On 04/13/2016 06:38 PM, Stefano Stabellini wrote: On Wed, 13 Apr 2016, Boris Ostrovsky wrote: On 04/13/2016 01:36 PM, Boris Ostrovsky wrote: On 04/12/2016 09:27 PM, Boris Ostrovsky wrote: On 04/12/2016 07:15 PM, Stefano Stabellini wrote: On Tue, 12 Apr 2016, Boris Ostrovsky wrote: On

Re: Xen regression, Was: [PATCH] x86/irq: Probe for PIC presence before allocating descs for legacy IRQs

On Wed, 13 Apr 2016, Boris Ostrovsky wrote: > On 04/13/2016 01:36 PM, Boris Ostrovsky wrote: > > On 04/12/2016 09:27 PM, Boris Ostrovsky wrote: > > > On 04/12/2016 07:15 PM, Stefano Stabellini wrote: > > > > On Tue, 12 Apr 2016, Boris Ostrovsky wrote: > > > > > On 04/12/2016 05:56 PM, Stefano

Re: Xen regression, Was: [PATCH] x86/irq: Probe for PIC presence before allocating descs for legacy IRQs

On Wed, 13 Apr 2016, Boris Ostrovsky wrote: > On 04/13/2016 01:36 PM, Boris Ostrovsky wrote: > > On 04/12/2016 09:27 PM, Boris Ostrovsky wrote: > > > On 04/12/2016 07:15 PM, Stefano Stabellini wrote: > > > > On Tue, 12 Apr 2016, Boris Ostrovsky wrote: > > > > > On 04/12/2016 05:56 PM, Stefano

Re: Xen regression, Was: [PATCH] x86/irq: Probe for PIC presence before allocating descs for legacy IRQs

On Wed, Apr 13, 2016 at 12:10 PM, Boris Ostrovsky wrote: > Note that paravirt_has() is being removed by > http://lists.xenproject.org/archives/html/xen-devel/2016-04/msg01415.html so > presumably we'd use new struct x86_legacy_features instead (copying Luis so > that

Re: Xen regression, Was: [PATCH] x86/irq: Probe for PIC presence before allocating descs for legacy IRQs

On Wed, Apr 13, 2016 at 12:10 PM, Boris Ostrovsky wrote: > Note that paravirt_has() is being removed by > http://lists.xenproject.org/archives/html/xen-devel/2016-04/msg01415.html so > presumably we'd use new struct x86_legacy_features instead (copying Luis so > that if this is acceptable he

Re: Xen regression, Was: [PATCH] x86/irq: Probe for PIC presence before allocating descs for legacy IRQs

On 04/13/2016 01:36 PM, Boris Ostrovsky wrote: On 04/12/2016 09:27 PM, Boris Ostrovsky wrote: On 04/12/2016 07:15 PM, Stefano Stabellini wrote: On Tue, 12 Apr 2016, Boris Ostrovsky wrote: On 04/12/2016 05:56 PM, Stefano Stabellini wrote: I am not sure, maybe you didn't have

Re: Xen regression, Was: [PATCH] x86/irq: Probe for PIC presence before allocating descs for legacy IRQs

On 04/13/2016 01:36 PM, Boris Ostrovsky wrote: On 04/12/2016 09:27 PM, Boris Ostrovsky wrote: On 04/12/2016 07:15 PM, Stefano Stabellini wrote: On Tue, 12 Apr 2016, Boris Ostrovsky wrote: On 04/12/2016 05:56 PM, Stefano Stabellini wrote: I am not sure, maybe you didn't have

Re: Xen regression, Was: [PATCH] x86/irq: Probe for PIC presence before allocating descs for legacy IRQs

On 04/12/2016 09:27 PM, Boris Ostrovsky wrote: On 04/12/2016 07:15 PM, Stefano Stabellini wrote: On Tue, 12 Apr 2016, Boris Ostrovsky wrote: On 04/12/2016 05:56 PM, Stefano Stabellini wrote: I am not sure, maybe you didn't have CONFIG_SPARSE_IRQ? But I am certain that 4.6-rc2, with the

Re: Xen regression, Was: [PATCH] x86/irq: Probe for PIC presence before allocating descs for legacy IRQs

On 04/12/2016 09:27 PM, Boris Ostrovsky wrote: On 04/12/2016 07:15 PM, Stefano Stabellini wrote: On Tue, 12 Apr 2016, Boris Ostrovsky wrote: On 04/12/2016 05:56 PM, Stefano Stabellini wrote: I am not sure, maybe you didn't have CONFIG_SPARSE_IRQ? But I am certain that 4.6-rc2, with the

Re: Xen regression, Was: [PATCH] x86/irq: Probe for PIC presence before allocating descs for legacy IRQs

On 04/12/2016 07:15 PM, Stefano Stabellini wrote: On Tue, 12 Apr 2016, Boris Ostrovsky wrote: On 04/12/2016 05:56 PM, Stefano Stabellini wrote: I am not sure, maybe you didn't have CONFIG_SPARSE_IRQ? But I am certain that 4.6-rc2, with the attached config, fails as Dom0 on QEMU with the

Re: Xen regression, Was: [PATCH] x86/irq: Probe for PIC presence before allocating descs for legacy IRQs

On 04/12/2016 07:15 PM, Stefano Stabellini wrote: On Tue, 12 Apr 2016, Boris Ostrovsky wrote: On 04/12/2016 05:56 PM, Stefano Stabellini wrote: I am not sure, maybe you didn't have CONFIG_SPARSE_IRQ? But I am certain that 4.6-rc2, with the attached config, fails as Dom0 on QEMU with the

Re: Xen regression, Was: [PATCH] x86/irq: Probe for PIC presence before allocating descs for legacy IRQs

On Tue, 12 Apr 2016, Boris Ostrovsky wrote: > On 04/12/2016 05:56 PM, Stefano Stabellini wrote: > > > > I am not sure, maybe you didn't have CONFIG_SPARSE_IRQ? > > But I am certain that 4.6-rc2, with the attached config, fails as Dom0 > > on QEMU with the following sequence of calls: > > I did

Re: Xen regression, Was: [PATCH] x86/irq: Probe for PIC presence before allocating descs for legacy IRQs

On Tue, 12 Apr 2016, Boris Ostrovsky wrote: > On 04/12/2016 05:56 PM, Stefano Stabellini wrote: > > > > I am not sure, maybe you didn't have CONFIG_SPARSE_IRQ? > > But I am certain that 4.6-rc2, with the attached config, fails as Dom0 > > on QEMU with the following sequence of calls: > > I did

Re: Xen regression, Was: [PATCH] x86/irq: Probe for PIC presence before allocating descs for legacy IRQs

On 04/12/2016 05:56 PM, Stefano Stabellini wrote: I am not sure, maybe you didn't have CONFIG_SPARSE_IRQ? But I am certain that 4.6-rc2, with the attached config, fails as Dom0 on QEMU with the following sequence of calls: I did have CONFIG_SPARSE_IRQ and I just rebuilt 4.5.0 with your

Re: Xen regression, Was: [PATCH] x86/irq: Probe for PIC presence before allocating descs for legacy IRQs

On 04/12/2016 05:56 PM, Stefano Stabellini wrote: I am not sure, maybe you didn't have CONFIG_SPARSE_IRQ? But I am certain that 4.6-rc2, with the attached config, fails as Dom0 on QEMU with the following sequence of calls: I did have CONFIG_SPARSE_IRQ and I just rebuilt 4.5.0 with your

Re: Xen regression, Was: [PATCH] x86/irq: Probe for PIC presence before allocating descs for legacy IRQs

On 04/12/2016 05:14 PM, Stefano Stabellini wrote: On Tue, 12 Apr 2016, Boris Ostrovsky wrote: On 04/12/2016 02:06 PM, Stefano Stabellini wrote: On Tue, 12 Apr 2016, Boris Ostrovsky wrote: On 04/11/2016 10:08 PM, Stefano Stabellini wrote: Hi all, Unfortunately this patch (now commit

Re: Xen regression, Was: [PATCH] x86/irq: Probe for PIC presence before allocating descs for legacy IRQs

On 04/12/2016 05:14 PM, Stefano Stabellini wrote: On Tue, 12 Apr 2016, Boris Ostrovsky wrote: On 04/12/2016 02:06 PM, Stefano Stabellini wrote: On Tue, 12 Apr 2016, Boris Ostrovsky wrote: On 04/11/2016 10:08 PM, Stefano Stabellini wrote: Hi all, Unfortunately this patch (now commit

Re: Xen regression, Was: [PATCH] x86/irq: Probe for PIC presence before allocating descs for legacy IRQs

On Tue, 12 Apr 2016, Boris Ostrovsky wrote: > On 04/12/2016 02:06 PM, Stefano Stabellini wrote: > > On Tue, 12 Apr 2016, Boris Ostrovsky wrote: > > > On 04/11/2016 10:08 PM, Stefano Stabellini wrote: > > > > Hi all, > > > > > > > > Unfortunately this patch (now commit > > > >

Re: Xen regression, Was: [PATCH] x86/irq: Probe for PIC presence before allocating descs for legacy IRQs

On Tue, 12 Apr 2016, Boris Ostrovsky wrote: > On 04/12/2016 02:06 PM, Stefano Stabellini wrote: > > On Tue, 12 Apr 2016, Boris Ostrovsky wrote: > > > On 04/11/2016 10:08 PM, Stefano Stabellini wrote: > > > > Hi all, > > > > > > > > Unfortunately this patch (now commit > > > >

Re: Xen regression, Was: [PATCH] x86/irq: Probe for PIC presence before allocating descs for legacy IRQs

On 04/12/2016 02:06 PM, Stefano Stabellini wrote: On Tue, 12 Apr 2016, Boris Ostrovsky wrote: On 04/11/2016 10:08 PM, Stefano Stabellini wrote: Hi all, Unfortunately this patch (now commit 8c058b0b9c34d8c8d7912880956543769323e2d8) causes a regression on Xen when running on top of QEMU: the

Re: Xen regression, Was: [PATCH] x86/irq: Probe for PIC presence before allocating descs for legacy IRQs

On 04/12/2016 02:06 PM, Stefano Stabellini wrote: On Tue, 12 Apr 2016, Boris Ostrovsky wrote: On 04/11/2016 10:08 PM, Stefano Stabellini wrote: Hi all, Unfortunately this patch (now commit 8c058b0b9c34d8c8d7912880956543769323e2d8) causes a regression on Xen when running on top of QEMU: the

Re: Xen regression, Was: [PATCH] x86/irq: Probe for PIC presence before allocating descs for legacy IRQs

On Tue, 12 Apr 2016, Boris Ostrovsky wrote: > On 04/11/2016 10:08 PM, Stefano Stabellini wrote: > > Hi all, > > > > Unfortunately this patch (now commit > > 8c058b0b9c34d8c8d7912880956543769323e2d8) causes a regression on Xen > > when running on top of QEMU: the number of PIT irqs get set to 0 by

Re: Xen regression, Was: [PATCH] x86/irq: Probe for PIC presence before allocating descs for legacy IRQs

On Tue, 12 Apr 2016, Boris Ostrovsky wrote: > On 04/11/2016 10:08 PM, Stefano Stabellini wrote: > > Hi all, > > > > Unfortunately this patch (now commit > > 8c058b0b9c34d8c8d7912880956543769323e2d8) causes a regression on Xen > > when running on top of QEMU: the number of PIT irqs get set to 0 by

Re: Xen regression, Was: [PATCH] x86/irq: Probe for PIC presence before allocating descs for legacy IRQs

On 04/11/2016 10:08 PM, Stefano Stabellini wrote: Hi all, Unfortunately this patch (now commit 8c058b0b9c34d8c8d7912880956543769323e2d8) causes a regression on Xen when running on top of QEMU: the number of PIT irqs get set to 0 by probe_8259A but actually there are 16. Any suggestions on how

Re: Xen regression, Was: [PATCH] x86/irq: Probe for PIC presence before allocating descs for legacy IRQs

On 04/11/2016 10:08 PM, Stefano Stabellini wrote: Hi all, Unfortunately this patch (now commit 8c058b0b9c34d8c8d7912880956543769323e2d8) causes a regression on Xen when running on top of QEMU: the number of PIT irqs get set to 0 by probe_8259A but actually there are 16. Any suggestions on how

Re: Xen regression, Was: [PATCH] x86/irq: Probe for PIC presence before allocating descs for legacy IRQs

Stefano Stabellini writes: > Hi all, > > Unfortunately this patch (now commit > 8c058b0b9c34d8c8d7912880956543769323e2d8) causes a regression on Xen > when running on top of QEMU: the number of PIT irqs get set to 0 by > probe_8259A but actually there are 16. > How would

Re: Xen regression, Was: [PATCH] x86/irq: Probe for PIC presence before allocating descs for legacy IRQs

Stefano Stabellini writes: > Hi all, > > Unfortunately this patch (now commit > 8c058b0b9c34d8c8d7912880956543769323e2d8) causes a regression on Xen > when running on top of QEMU: the number of PIT irqs get set to 0 by > probe_8259A but actually there are 16. > How would one see the regression?

Xen regression, Was: [PATCH] x86/irq: Probe for PIC presence before allocating descs for legacy IRQs

Hi all, Unfortunately this patch (now commit 8c058b0b9c34d8c8d7912880956543769323e2d8) causes a regression on Xen when running on top of QEMU: the number of PIT irqs get set to 0 by probe_8259A but actually there are 16. Any suggestions on how to fix this? 1) we could revert

Xen regression, Was: [PATCH] x86/irq: Probe for PIC presence before allocating descs for legacy IRQs

Hi all, Unfortunately this patch (now commit 8c058b0b9c34d8c8d7912880956543769323e2d8) causes a regression on Xen when running on top of QEMU: the number of PIT irqs get set to 0 by probe_8259A but actually there are 16. Any suggestions on how to fix this? 1) we could revert