From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: "Zhang, Yang Z" <yang.z.zhang@intel.com>
Subject: Re: Please revert / review
 077fc1c04d70ef1748ac2daa6622b3320a1a004c
Date: Mon, 16 Jun 2014 07:47:11 +0000
Message-ID: <A9667DDFB95DB7438FA9D7D576C3D87E0AAF9ABB@SHSMSX104.ccr.corp.intel.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>
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: <CABoYbGpm_Mfa+t=mZn=GAsGrJKtptydZ9T1Q9Vj-pKHtOY9i7g@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Language: en-US
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>
Cc: "tim@xen.org" <tim@xen.org>, "xen-devel@lists.xen.org" <xen-devel@lists.xen.org>
List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org

Matthias wrote on 2014-06-12:
> Yes, I'm seeing the
> (XEN) testing: enable log dirty mode
> 
> in xl dmesg.

I cannot understand why log dirty is used in AMD gfx passthrough.

> 
> 
> Also, here are logs and additional information from a start with a xen 
> build up to the 077fc1c changeset. DomU Name is WORK.
> 
> I haven't attached a xl dmesg log because it was only filled with this:

It's better to attach the whole log since there are some debug messages which are useful. If the log buffer isn't enough, please add conring_size=xxM to Xen cmd line.

> 
> 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?


Best regards,
Yang