* James Neave (roboj1m@xxxxxxxxx) wrote: > On Fri, Feb 25, 2011 at 11:02 PM, James Neave <roboj1m@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Fri, Feb 25, 2011 at 10:47 PM, James Neave <roboj1m@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> On Fri, Feb 25, 2011 at 12:06 AM, Chris Wright <chrisw@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >>> * James Neave (roboj1m@xxxxxxxxx) wrote: > >>>> OK, here's my latest dmesg with amd_iommu_dump and debug with no quiet > >>>> http://pastebin.com/JxEwvqRA > >>> > >>> Yeah, that's what I expected: > >>> > >>> [ 0.724403] AMD-Vi: DEV_ALIAS_RANGE devid: 08:00.0 flags: 00 devid_to: 00:14.4 > >>> [ 0.724439] AMD-Vi: DEV_RANGE_END devid: 08:1f.7 > >>> > >>> That basically says 08:00.0 - 08:1f.7 will show up as 00:14.4 (and > >>> should all go into same iommu domain). > >>> > >>>> I've just figured out a sequence of "echo DEV > PATH" commands to call > >>>> for 14.4 gets me past the "claimed by pci-stub" error and gets me to > >>>> the "failed to assign IRQ" error. > >>>> I'm going to narrow down the required sequence and then post it. > >>> > >>> Kind of afraid to ask, but does it include: > >>> > >>> (assuming 1002 4384 is the pci to pci bridge) > >>> echo 1002 4384 > /sys/bus/pci/drivers/pci-stub/new_id > >>> echo 0000:00:14.4 > /sys/bus/pci/drivers/pci-stub/unbind > >>> > >>> (this has the side effect of detaching the bridge from its domain) > >>> > >>> thanks, > >>> -chris > >>> > >> > >> Exact sequence is: > >> > >> echo "1002 4384" > /sys/bus/pci/drivers/pci-stub/new_id > >> echo "0000:00:14.4" > /sys/bus/pci/devices/0000:00:14.4/driver/unbind > >> > >> I take it this is a bad thing then? > >> > >>> I assume this means that 00:14.4 is still left claimed by pci-stub? > >> > >> Yes > >> > >>> How are you determining this? The lspci paste above has pci-stub for all > >>> of them. The easiest thing might be to start with manually disabling > >>> host driver and reassigning pci-stub to: 00:14.4, 08: 06.2,3 and 0e.0 > >>> Then giving the guest only 08:06.1. > >> > >> I determined it by being half asleep and not reading it properly... >.< > >> You're right, all 5 devices were using pci-stub > >> > >>>> libvirtError: this function is not supported by the connection driver: > >>>> Unable to reset PCI device 0000:00:14.4: no FLR, PM reset or bus reset > >>>> available > >> > >>> Right, libvirt is more restrictive than qemu-kvm (forgot you were using > >>> libvirt here). > >> > >> What does that libvirt error mean? I can't find a definition. > >> Am I limiting myself by using libvirt? Would not using it help and how > >> would I go about not using it? > >> > >>> Trouble now is that > >>> with shared IRQ we don't have a good way to handle that right now. > >> > >> Game over then? > >> I've tried assigning the USB devices before, I couldn't do it because > >> qemu doesn't support USB2 devices. > >> I don't really understand where this IRQ conflict is, the firewire and > >> the USB2 device share IRQ22 but I'm assigning them both to the VM? > >> Is that still a problem? > >> I don't suppose there's any way to change which IRQ they use in the > >> BIOS or with a command is there? > >> > >> I don't know if it means anything but this page: > >> > >> http://linuxtv.org/wiki/index.php/Hauppauge_WinTV-HVR-2200 > >> > >> Has the lspci output for the HVR-2200 which mentions MSI and IRQ255. > >> My knowledge it very limited on this subject so I don't know if that's > >> meaningless looking at the output from another person's lspci. > >> > >> Anything left to try? > >> > >> Regardless, many thanks for your help, > >> > >> James. > >> > > > > On the off chance I tried disabling the firewire in the BIOS, which > > leaves only my tuner card using IRQ 20, 21 and 22. > > No difference, still complains about IRQs: > > > > Using raw in/out ioport access (sysfs - Input/output error) > > Failed to assign irq for "hostdev0": Operation not permitted > > Perhaps you are assigning a device that shares an IRQ with another device? > > > > It does say "Operation not permitted" and that only "perhaps" I am > > assigning a device that shares an IRQ. > > Perhaps IRQ conflict it not the problem? They really are sitting on > > their own. Another permissions problem perhaps? > > > > Regards, > > > > James. > > > > I'm reading something about this error message being related to > libvirt and CAP_SYS_RAWIO? Depending on how new your libvirt is, you can force it to stop dropping capabilities. Look for the config item "clear_emulator_capabilities" in /etc/libvirt/qemu.conf. Setting this to 0 would verify that's the problem (and not a real shared irq...i thought i saw sharing on /proc/interrupts though). > > http://www.mail-archive.com/kvm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx/msg34338.html > http://www.google.co.uk/#hl=en&xhr=t&q=libvirt+CAP_SYS_RAWIO&cp=21&pf=p&sclient=psy&aq=f&aqi=&aql=&oq=libvirt+CAP_SYS_RAWIO&pbx=1&fp=2d8e3f69fec095f4 > > "When I patch libvirt to not drop the capabilities, everything works > as expected." Well, that's a good point. We fixed that a while ago, but I'm not sure your kernel has that fix. 2.6.35.10-dmar (btw, random nitpick, dmar == intel dma remapping engine, aka vt-d not amd iommu ;) This was fixed in 2.6.36, commit: 48bb09e KVM: remove CAP_SYS_RAWIO requirement from kvm_vm_ioctl_assign_irq The last 2.6.35 stable release is 2.6.35.9 and does not have that fix. So unless your .10-dmar has it, you could patch it in. thanks, -chris -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kvm" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
