From xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org Mon Nov 04 15:49:05 2013 Received: (at maildrop) by bugs.xenproject.org; 4 Nov 2013 15:49:05 +0000 Received: from lists.xen.org ([50.57.142.19]) by bugs.xenproject.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1VdMOn-0005va-K4 for xen-devel-maildrop-Eithu9ie@bugs.xenproject.org; Mon, 04 Nov 2013 15:49:05 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.xen.org) by lists.xen.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1VdMLM-0003jP-So; Mon, 04 Nov 2013 15:45:32 +0000 Received: from mail6.bemta5.messagelabs.com ([195.245.231.135]) by lists.xen.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1VdMLL-0003ip-9j for xen-devel@lists.xen.org; Mon, 04 Nov 2013 15:45:31 +0000 Received: from [85.158.139.211:8907] by server-5.bemta-5.messagelabs.com id A2/D4-13073-A11C7725; Mon, 04 Nov 2013 15:45:30 +0000 X-Env-Sender: Ian.Campbell@citrix.com X-Msg-Ref: server-14.tower-206.messagelabs.com!1383579928!1488231!1 X-Originating-IP: [66.165.176.89] X-SpamReason: No, hits=0.0 required=7.0 tests=sa_preprocessor: VHJ1c3RlZCBJUDogNjYuMTY1LjE3Ni44OSA9PiAyMDMwMDc=\n X-StarScan-Received: X-StarScan-Version: 6.9.12; banners=-,-,- X-VirusChecked: Checked Received: (qmail 25977 invoked from network); 4 Nov 2013 15:45:29 -0000 Received: from smtp.citrix.com (HELO SMTP.CITRIX.COM) (66.165.176.89) by server-14.tower-206.messagelabs.com with RC4-SHA encrypted SMTP; 4 Nov 2013 15:45:29 -0000 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.93,633,1378857600"; d="scan'208";a="70344934" Received: from accessns.citrite.net (HELO FTLPEX01CL02.citrite.net) ([10.9.154.239]) by FTLPIPO01.CITRIX.COM with ESMTP; 04 Nov 2013 15:45:27 +0000 Received: from LONPEX01CL01.citrite.net (10.30.203.101) by FTLPEX01CL02.citrite.net (10.13.107.79) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.2.342.4; Mon, 4 Nov 2013 10:45:27 -0500 Received: from [10.80.2.80] (10.30.203.1) by LONPEX01CL01.citrite.net (10.30.203.101) with Microsoft SMTP Server id 14.2.342.4; Mon, 4 Nov 2013 15:45:25 +0000 Message-ID: <1383579925.8826.102.camel@kazak.uk.xensource.com> From: Ian Campbell To: Saurabh Mishra Date: Mon, 4 Nov 2013 15:45:25 +0000 In-Reply-To: References: Organization: Citrix Systems, Inc. X-Mailer: Evolution 3.4.4-3 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Originating-IP: [10.30.203.1] X-DLP: MIA2 Cc: xen-devel@lists.xen.org Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] PCI Passthrough question (xm->xl migration in Xen 4.2.2) X-BeenThere: xen-devel@lists.xen.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.13 Precedence: list List-Id: Xen developer discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org create ^ title it xl does not support specifying virtual function for passthrough device thanks On Thu, 2013-10-31 at 14:29 -0700, Saurabh Mishra wrote: > In XM toolchain, we use to put pci = [ '0000:07:11.6=0@1a' ] but looks > like in XL toolchain there is no way to specify function in the guest. The code is a bit confusing, but that does appear to be the case. libxl seems to have some degree of support but I can't see any code in xl (or the libxlu helper library function which parses the PCI options) that would support the =N@M syntax. Given the lack of xl support there's a good chance that the libxl support is relatively untested. > Kindly let me know. > > > XM - pci = [ '0000:07:11.6=0@1a' ] > XL - pci = [ '0000:07:11.6@1a' ] > > > In the guest VM we see that PCI device is getting 0 function in both > the cases however, it may not work the same way in the future. Do you happen to know (or can you easily do the experiment to find out) what happens with '0000:07:11.6@1a' on xm? Does the guest see function 0 or function 6? If it is 0 then I think we can safely say xl will not change, but if it is 6 we'll have to have a think... Ian. _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xen.org http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel