On Fri, Jun 26, 2015 at 04:04:30PM +0100, Jan Beulich wrote: > (re-adding xen-devel) > > >>> On 26.06.15 at 15:38, <li...@eikelenboom.it> wrote: > > On 2015-06-26 14:41, Jan Beulich wrote: > >>>>> On 26.06.15 at 13:02, <li...@eikelenboom.it> wrote: > >>> Strange, i don't see *any* of your printk's being hit ... (xl dmesg > >>> attached). > >> > >> So does the guest (in the working case) use MSI-X at all for the > >> device? I.e. it might be worth comparing the guest's /proc/interrupts > >> from both cases, as the lack of any of the debug messages clearly > >> suggests that such interrupts aren#t being set up. > > > > In the good case it uses one of them. > > (probably one per port and it has only one usb device connected at > > present) > > > > -- > > Sander > > > > CPU0 CPU1 CPU2 CPU3 > > 0: 42 0 0 0 IO-APIC 2-edge > > timer > >[...] > > 83: 8 0 0 0 xen-dyn-event > > eth0-q3-rx > > 84: 2101 0 0 0 xen-pirq-msi-x > > xhci_hcd > > I think this explains it - you're running in PVHVM mode, which I > never tried with those patches. I'd even have to go dig to see how > they drive MSI-X in the first place in that case. Nor do I immediately > know whether there's an option to make a guest become a normal > HVM one again.
xen_nopv > > Jan > > > _______________________________________________ > 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