On Mon, 2013-12-30 at 16:13 -0800, Dana Goyette wrote: > On 12/29/2013 08:16 PM, Alex Williamson wrote: > > On Sat, 2013-12-28 at 23:32 -0800, Dana Goyette wrote: > >> On 12/28/2013 7:23 PM, Alex Williamson wrote: > >>> On Sat, 2013-12-28 at 18:31 -0800, Dana Goyette wrote: > >>>> I have purchased both a SuperMicro X10SAE and an X10SAT, and I need to > >>>> soon decide which one to keep. > >>>> > >>>> The SuperMicro X10SAT has all the PCIe x1 slots hidden behind a PLX > >>>> PEX8066 switch, which claims to support ACS. I'd expect the devices > >>>> downstream of the PLX switch to be in separate groups. > >>>> > >>>> With Linux 3.13-rc5 and "enable overrides for missing ACS capabilities" > >>>> applied and set for the Intel root ports, the devices behind the switch > >>>> remain stuck in the same group. > >>>> > >>>> In terms of passing devices to different VMs, which is better: all > >>>> devices on different root ports, or all devices behind the one > >>>> ACS-supporting switch? > >>> > >>> Can you provide lspci -vvv info? If you're getting that for groups > >>> either the switch has ACS capabilities, but doesn't support the features > >>> we need or we're doing something wrong. Thanks, > >>> > >> I initially tried attaching the output as a .txt file, but it's too > >> large. Anyway, here's the output of lspci -nnvvv (you may notice that I > >> moved the Radeon to a different slot). > > > > Well, something seems amiss since the downstream switch ports all seem > > to support and enable the correct set of ACS capabilities. I'm tending > > to suspect something wrong with the ACS override patch or how it's being > > used since your IOMMU group is still based at the root port. Each root > > port is isolated from the other root ports though, so something is > > happening with the override patch. Can you provide the kernel command > > line you use to enable ACS overrides and the override patch you're > > using, as it applies to 3.13-rc5? Thanks, > > > > Alex > > > > -- > > 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 > > > I'm using the original acs-override patch from this post: > https://lkml.org/lkml/2013/5/30/513 > > Kernel parameter is: > pcie_acs_override=id:8086:8c10,id:8086:8c12,id:8086:8c16,id:8086:8c18 > > When booting a kernel without the override patch, the following devices > are all in the same group: Intel Root Ports 1, 2, 4, 5; ASMedia SATA > controller; PLX PEX8606 switch; Renesas USB controller; TI Firewire > controller; Intel I210 Ethernet controller. Ok, here's my shot in the dark; we must be detecting something about the upstream switch port to make it fail the ACS test and the only thing I can find that might do this is if the PCI config header on the upstream switch reported itself as a multifunction device. Multifunction upstream switch ports do need ACS capabilities to make sure that traffic isn't routed back through other functions. Single function devices do not. To test that theory, please provide 'lspci -vxs 4:00.0'. We're looking to see whether the byte at 0xe has the MSB set. If it does, it lies that it's a multifunction device. If it doesn't I'll have to get the dart board back out. FWIW, you should be able to work around this by adding id:10b5:8606 to your list of overrides. Long term, if this is the problem, we'll want to add a quirk to sanitize the multifunction device flag. Thanks, Alex -- 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
