Nice catch. Fixes look good. John Levon wrote: > Nevada fix: > > http://cr.opensolaris.org/~johnlev/hvm-evtchn/ > > Hypervisor workaround: > > http://cr.opensolaris.org/~johnlev/hvm-evtchn-workaround/ > > > The first webrev: we must only ever use CPU0's evtchn structures. This > is part of the HVM PV ABI and it's always been broken. > > Sadly, this is broken in our S10 backport too. The fix should get > backported, but luckily there's a fairly simple workaround available in > the hypervisor, which is already in place for pit0 interrupts. This is > the second webrev. > > Note that this means that if an HVM domU offlines CPU#0, it will still > get the HVM callback IRQ on CPU#0. This goes against typical expectation > for what "offlining" means, but I've verified that this works OK on > Nevada and S10. Additionally, since offlining CPU#0 is not something > that makes sense in HVM anyway, it's not something we expect people to > do, beyond PIT's test suite. > > As well as fixing the bug listed above, this now allows Solaris HVM to > boot with > 2 VCPUs. Previously this was re-distributing the callback > IRQ onto VCPU!=0, triggering the same issue. I've booted 8-way HVM on > both S10 and Nevada w/o problems. > > thanks > john > _______________________________________________ > xen-discuss mailing list > xen-discuss@opensolaris.org
-- ----------------------------------------------------- Russ Blaine | Solaris Kernel | [EMAIL PROTECTED] _______________________________________________ xen-discuss mailing list xen-discuss@opensolaris.org
