Re: [Xen-devel] Possible bug on ARM with irq passthrough

2017-07-27 Thread Dario Faggioli
Hello again, On Sat, 2017-07-08 at 09:25 +0200, Dario Faggioli wrote: > On Fri, 2017-07-07 at 17:19 +0100, Julien Grall wrote: > >  I would  > > recommend to stick on credit1 until this bug is fixed (I will mark > > it > > as  > > a blocker). > > > > Right. As said, it's on my priority list

Re: [Xen-devel] Possible bug on ARM with irq passthrough

2017-07-08 Thread Dario Faggioli
On Fri, 2017-07-07 at 17:19 +0100, Julien Grall wrote: > On 05/07/17 14:50, Ivan Pavic wrote: > > On 07/05/2017 02:55 PM, Julien Grall wrote: > > > > > > If you got a message in the former, but not the latter. Then you > > > hit > > > the bug described in my previous e-mail. > > > > Yes,

Re: [Xen-devel] Possible bug on ARM with irq passthrough

2017-07-07 Thread Julien Grall
Hi Ivan, On 05/07/17 14:50, Ivan Pavic wrote: On 07/05/2017 02:55 PM, Julien Grall wrote: Hi Ivan, On 05/07/17 13:36, Ivan Pavic wrote: On 07/05/2017 01:27 PM, Julien Grall wrote: On 04/07/17 21:20, Ivan Pavić2 wrote: Hello, Hi Ivan, I'm testing IRQ latency on exynos5422. I'm using

Re: [Xen-devel] Possible bug on ARM with irq passthrough

2017-07-05 Thread Ivan Pavic
On 07/05/2017 02:55 PM, Julien Grall wrote: Hi Ivan, On 05/07/17 13:36, Ivan Pavic wrote: On 07/05/2017 01:27 PM, Julien Grall wrote: On 04/07/17 21:20, Ivan Pavić2 wrote: Hello, Hi Ivan, I'm testing IRQ latency on exynos5422. I'm using Xen 4.10-unstable. I used device passthrough for

Re: [Xen-devel] Possible bug on ARM with irq passthrough

2017-07-05 Thread Dario Faggioli
On Wed, 2017-07-05 at 13:55 +0100, Julien Grall wrote: > > If you got a message in the former, but not the latter. Then you hit > the  > bug described in my previous e-mail. > > This would happen if some of the pCPUs are idle states (using wfi).r. > The main difference between credit1 and

Re: [Xen-devel] Possible bug on ARM with irq passthrough

2017-07-05 Thread Dario Faggioli
On Wed, 2017-07-05 at 12:27 +0100, Julien Grall wrote: > On 04/07/17 21:20, Ivan Pavić2 wrote: > > > > This is very strange because it doesn't happen with credit > > scheduler. This is output of xl dmesg: > > > > (XEN) IRQ 64 is already used by domain 1 > > > > Everything works first time but

Re: [Xen-devel] Possible bug on ARM with irq passthrough

2017-07-05 Thread Julien Grall
Hi Ivan, On 05/07/17 13:36, Ivan Pavic wrote: On 07/05/2017 01:27 PM, Julien Grall wrote: On 04/07/17 21:20, Ivan Pavić2 wrote: Hello, Hi Ivan, I'm testing IRQ latency on exynos5422. I'm using Xen 4.10-unstable. I used device passthrough for SPI irq 64. For guest domain I used FreeRTOS.

Re: [Xen-devel] Possible bug on ARM with irq passthrough

2017-07-05 Thread Ivan Pavic
On 07/05/2017 01:27 PM, Julien Grall wrote: On 04/07/17 21:20, Ivan Pavić2 wrote: Hello, Hi Ivan, I'm testing IRQ latency on exynos5422. I'm using Xen 4.10-unstable. I used device passthrough for SPI irq 64. For guest domain I used FreeRTOS. When I use credit scheduler after destruction

Re: [Xen-devel] Possible bug on ARM with irq passthrough

2017-07-05 Thread Julien Grall
On 04/07/17 21:20, Ivan Pavić2 wrote: Hello, Hi Ivan, I'm testing IRQ latency on exynos5422. I'm using Xen 4.10-unstable. I used device passthrough for SPI irq 64. For guest domain I used FreeRTOS. When I use credit scheduler after destruction of domain, IRQ is released. I changed

[Xen-devel] Possible bug on ARM with irq passthrough

2017-07-04 Thread Ivan Pavić2
Hello, I'm testing IRQ latency on exynos5422. I'm using Xen 4.10-unstable. I used device passthrough for SPI irq 64. For guest domain I used  FreeRTOS. When I use credit scheduler after destruction of domain, IRQ is released. I changed scheduler to credit2 and rtds at boot time and IRQ wasn't