From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: "Jan Beulich" <JBeulich@suse.com>
Subject: Re: Please revert / review
 077fc1c04d70ef1748ac2daa6622b3320a1a004c
Date: Mon, 16 Jun 2014 09:08:40 +0100
Message-ID: <539EC228020000780001A7FC@mail.emea.novell.com>
References: <CABoYbGpyFWPhbA52u7Bys93dVwSsYuHv72LZWh4BPLJW5fH89Q@mail.gmail.com>
	<A9667DDFB95DB7438FA9D7D576C3D87E0AAF65C3@SHSMSX104.ccr.corp.intel.com>
	<5399828D02000078000B63B7@mail.emea.novell.com>
	<CABoYbGpm_Mfa+t=mZn=GAsGrJKtptydZ9T1Q9Vj-pKHtOY9i7g@mail.gmail.com>
	<A9667DDFB95DB7438FA9D7D576C3D87E0AAF9ABB@SHSMSX104.ccr.corp.intel.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Return-path: <xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org>
In-Reply-To: <A9667DDFB95DB7438FA9D7D576C3D87E0AAF9ABB@SHSMSX104.ccr.corp.intel.com>
Content-Disposition: inline
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.xen.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/xen-devel>,
	<mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xen.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Post: <mailto:xen-devel@lists.xen.org>
List-Help: <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xen.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.xen.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>,
	<mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xen.org?subject=subscribe>
Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org
Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org
To: Matthias <matthias.kannenberg@googlemail.com>, Yang Z Zhang <yang.z.zhang@intel.com>
Cc: "tim@xen.org" <tim@xen.org>, "xen-devel@lists.xen.org" <xen-devel@lists.xen.org>
List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org

>>> On 16.06.14 at 09:47, <yang.z.zhang@intel.com> wrote:
> Matthias wrote on 2014-06-12:
>> domain = 0, device id = 0x98, fault address = 0xffffffc0, flags = 0
>> (XEN) AMD-Vi: IO_PAGE_FAULT: domain = 0, device id = 0x90, fault 
>> address = 0xffffffc0, flags = 0
>> (XEN) AMD-Vi: IO_PAGE_FAULT: domain = 0, device id = 0x98, fault 
>> address = 0xffffffc0, flags = 0
>> (XEN) AMD-Vi: IO_PAGE_FAULT: domain = 0, device id = 0x90, fault 
>> address = 0xffffffc0, flags = 0
>> (XEN) AMD-Vi: IO_PAGE_FAULT: domain = 0, device id = 0x98, fault 
>> address = 0xffffffc0, flags = 0
>> (XEN) AMD-Vi: IO_PAGE_FAULT: domain = 0, device id = 0x90, fault 
>> address = 0xffffffc0, flags = 0
>> (XEN) AMD-Vi: IO_PAGE_FAULT: domain = 0, device id = 0x98, fault 
>> address = 0xffffffc0, flags = 0
>> (XEN) AMD-Vi: IO_PAGE_FAULT: domain = 0, device id = 0x90, fault 
>> address = 0xffffffc0, flags = 0
> 
> This is really strange. The fault shows it is caused by dom0's activity. But 
> the device have assigned to the guest. Are you sure the devices(00:13.0 and 
> 00:12.0) are hidden and dom0 is not using it? BTW, what are the devices of 
> 00:12.0 and 00:13.0?

It's not just that which is odd. The fault address is suspicious too;
I only ever saw such along with discovering what led to 6b4d71d0
("AMD IOMMU: don't free page table prematurely". Matthias - it
certainly wouldn't hurt if you included that fix in whatever you build
your hypervisor from (backports are already available in older trees).

Jan

Jan