On Fri, Mar 13, 2015 at 02:28:20PM +0800, Fam Zheng wrote:
> On Fri, 03/13 14:07, Fam Zheng wrote:
> > On Thu, 03/12 12:15, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> > > On Thu, Mar 12, 2015 at 11:04:33AM +, Peter Maydell wrote:
> > > > On 12 March 2015 at 10:57, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> > > > > This isn
On Fri, Mar 13, 2015 at 02:07:19PM +0800, Fam Zheng wrote:
> On Thu, 03/12 12:15, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> > On Thu, Mar 12, 2015 at 11:04:33AM +, Peter Maydell wrote:
> > > On 12 March 2015 at 10:57, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> > > > This isn't a device reset though.
> > > > The function t
On Fri, 03/13 14:07, Fam Zheng wrote:
> On Thu, 03/12 12:15, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> > On Thu, Mar 12, 2015 at 11:04:33AM +, Peter Maydell wrote:
> > > On 12 March 2015 at 10:57, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> > > > This isn't a device reset though.
> > > > The function that Fam is touching i
On Thu, 03/12 12:15, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 12, 2015 at 11:04:33AM +, Peter Maydell wrote:
> > On 12 March 2015 at 10:57, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> > > This isn't a device reset though.
> > > The function that Fam is touching is called
> > > when a special "virtio reset" reg
On Thu, Mar 12, 2015 at 11:04:33AM +, Peter Maydell wrote:
> On 12 March 2015 at 10:57, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> > This isn't a device reset though.
> > The function that Fam is touching is called
> > when a special "virtio reset" register to
> > poked by the driver.
> > It only resets part
On 12 March 2015 at 10:57, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> This isn't a device reset though.
> The function that Fam is touching is called
> when a special "virtio reset" register to
> poked by the driver.
> It only resets part of the device, not all of it,
> and it seems reasonable to ask that it cle
On Thu, Mar 12, 2015 at 10:21:47AM +, Peter Maydell wrote:
> On 12 March 2015 at 10:16, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> > So thinking about this more, by the time kdump tries to reset device,
> > linux has probably already disabled the IRQ at the APIC level.
> > Isn't that the case? If so, the pat
On 12 March 2015 at 10:16, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> So thinking about this more, by the time kdump tries to reset device,
> linux has probably already disabled the IRQ at the APIC level.
> Isn't that the case? If so, the patch won't help, will it?
Trying to deassert (or worse, assert) interrup
On Thu, Mar 12, 2015 at 06:00:28PM +0800, Fam Zheng wrote:
> On Thu, 03/12 10:41, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> > On Thu, Mar 12, 2015 at 02:40:55PM +0800, Fam Zheng wrote:
> > > Currently we could leave PCI IRQ asserted even after reset, it is safer
> > > to clear it.
> > >
> > > In the case that a
On Thu, Mar 12, 2015 at 06:00:28PM +0800, Fam Zheng wrote:
> On Thu, 03/12 10:41, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> > On Thu, Mar 12, 2015 at 02:40:55PM +0800, Fam Zheng wrote:
> > > Currently we could leave PCI IRQ asserted even after reset, it is safer
> > > to clear it.
> > >
> > > In the case that a
On Thu, 03/12 10:41, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 12, 2015 at 02:40:55PM +0800, Fam Zheng wrote:
> > Currently we could leave PCI IRQ asserted even after reset, it is safer
> > to clear it.
> >
> > In the case that a buggy driver has disabled MSI-X unintentially, we may
> > have already
On Thu, Mar 12, 2015 at 02:40:55PM +0800, Fam Zheng wrote:
> Currently we could leave PCI IRQ asserted even after reset, it is safer
> to clear it.
>
> In the case that a buggy driver has disabled MSI-X unintentially, we may
> have already injected IRQ in previous virtio_pci_notify, which will not
On Thu, 03/12 08:22, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 12, 2015 at 02:40:55PM +0800, Fam Zheng wrote:
> > Currently we could leave PCI IRQ asserted even after reset, it is safer
> > to clear it.
> >
> > In the case that a buggy driver has disabled MSI-X unintentially, we may
> > have already
On Thu, Mar 12, 2015 at 02:40:55PM +0800, Fam Zheng wrote:
> Currently we could leave PCI IRQ asserted even after reset, it is safer
> to clear it.
>
> In the case that a buggy driver has disabled MSI-X unintentially, we may
> have already injected IRQ in previous virtio_pci_notify, which will not
Currently we could leave PCI IRQ asserted even after reset, it is safer
to clear it.
In the case that a buggy driver has disabled MSI-X unintentially, we may
have already injected IRQ in previous virtio_pci_notify, which will not
be cleared by guest because it doesn't expect it (i.e. no irq handle
15 matches
Mail list logo
