From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Jan Beulich" Subject: Re: Clarifying PVH mode requirements Date: Tue, 02 Feb 2016 08:51:02 -0700 Message-ID: <56B0DE7602000078000CD9CE@prv-mh.provo.novell.com> References: <56AE7C3B.7010100@gmail.com> <20160201095944.GA10990@citrix.com> <56AF4E52.30006@gmail.com> <56AF4F9F.1030607@citrix.com> <56AF51C8.6000601@gmail.com> <56AF5FC6.8050404@gmail.com> <56AF71AD.8010100@oracle.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <56AF71AD.8010100@oracle.com> Content-Disposition: inline List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org To: PGNet Dev Cc: Boris Ostrovsky , xen-devel@lists.xen.org, wei.liu2@citrix.com, roger.pau@citrix.com List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org >>> On 01.02.16 at 15:54, wrote: > This looks very much like it needs backport of 33c19df9a ("x86/PCI: > intercept accesses to RO MMIO from dom0s in HVM containers") from > unstable, which fixes PVH regression introduced by 9256f66c1606 > ("x86/PCI: intercept all PV Dom0 MMCFG writes") So would you please confirm that this indeed fixes your issue? I'm hesitant to put it in without confirmation, and it's likely too late for 4.6.1 now anyway (so would then only appear in 4.6.2). Jan