qemu-devel
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Qemu-devel] Re: [RFT][PATCH 07/15] qemu_irq: Add IRQ handlers with


From: Blue Swirl
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] Re: [RFT][PATCH 07/15] qemu_irq: Add IRQ handlers with delivery feedback
Date: Sun, 30 May 2010 13:22:31 +0000

2010/5/30 Gleb Natapov <address@hidden>:
> On Sun, May 30, 2010 at 12:10:16PM +0000, Blue Swirl wrote:
>> >> >> You missed the key word 'stopped'. If the timer is really stopped, no
>> >> >> IRQs should ever come out afterwards, just like on real HW. For the
>> >> >> emulation, this means loss of ticks which should have been delivered
>> >> >> before the change.
>> >> >>
>> >> > I haven't missed it. I describe to you reality of the situation. You 
>> >> > want
>> >> > to change reality to be more close to what you want it to be by adding
>> >> > words to my description.
>> >>
>> >> Quoting Jan: 'So what to do with the backlog when the timer is
>> >> stopped?' I didn't add any words to your description, please be more
>> >> careful with your attributions. Why do you think I want to change the
>> >> reality?
>> > Please refer to my words when you answer to my quote. You quoted my
>> > answer to you statement:
>> >  Gleb only mentioned the frequency change, I thought that was not so big
>> >  problem. But I don't think this case should be allowed happen at all,
>> >  it can't exist on real HW.
>>
>> With 'this case' I was referring to 'case with timer stopped', not
>> 'case which Gleb mentioned'.
>>
>> > No 'stopped' was under discussion nowhere.
>>
>> It's clearly written there in the sentence Jan wrote.
>>
> Jan, not me, but lets leave this topic alone since you agree that
> stopped is just a case of frequency change anyway.
>
>> > FWIW 'stopped' is just a case
>> > of frequency change.
>>
>> True.
>>
>> >
>> >>
>> >> XP frequency change isn't the same case as timer being stopped.
>> >>
>> > And what is the big difference exactly?
>>
>> Because after the timer is stopped, its extremely unrealistic to send
>> any IRQs. Whereas if the frequency is changed to some other nonzero
>> value, we can cheat and inject some more queued IRQs.
>>
> Correct, when gets disables clock source (by reset or any other means)
> coalesced backlog should be forgotten.
>
>> Anyway, if this case is not interesting because it doesn't happen in
>> real life emulation scenarios, we can forget it no matter how buggy
>> the current QEMU implementation is.
>>
>> >> > Please just go write code, experiment, debug
>> >> > and _then_ come here with design.
>> >>
>> >> I added some debugging to RTC, PIC and APIC. I also built a small
>> >> guest in x86 assembly to test the coalescing. However, in the tests
>> >> with this guest and others I noticed that the coalescing only happens
>> >> in some obscure conditions.
>> > So try with real guest and with real load.
>>
>> Well, I'd like to get the test program also trigger it. Now I'm getting:
>> apic: write: 00000350 = 00000000
>> apic: apic_reset_irq_delivered: old coalescing 0
>> apic: apic_local_deliver: vector 3 delivery mode 0
>> apic: apic_set_irq: coalescing 1
>> apic: apic_get_irq_delivered: returning coalescing 1
>> apic: apic_reset_irq_delivered: old coalescing 1
>> apic: apic_local_deliver: vector 3 delivery mode 0
>> apic: apic_set_irq: coalescing 0
>> apic: apic_get_irq_delivered: returning coalescing 0
>> apic: apic_reset_irq_delivered: old coalescing 0
>> apic: apic_local_deliver: vector 3 delivery mode 0
>> apic: apic_set_irq: coalescing 0
>>
>> It looks like some other IRQs cause the coalescing, because also
>> looking at RTC code, it seems it's not possible for RTC to raise the
>> IRQ (except update IRQ, alarm etc.) without calling
>> apic_reset_irq_delivered().
>>
>> I've attached my test program. Compile:
>> gcc -m32 -o coalescing coalescing.S -ffreestanding -nostdlib -Wl,-T
>> coalescing.ld -g && objcopy -Obinary coalescing coalescing.bin
>>
>> Run:
>> qemu -L . -bios coalescing.bin -no-hpet -rtc-td-hack
>>
> The application does not work for me. Looks like it fails to enter
> protected mode. $pc jumps from 0x00000000fffffff0 to 0x00000000000f003e
> and back.
>
>> >>
>> >> By default the APIC's delivery method for IRQs is ExtInt and
>> >> coalescing counting happens only with Fixed. This means that the guest
>> >> needs to reprogram APIC. It also looks like RTC interrupts need to be
>> >> triggered. But I didn't see both of these to happen simultaneously in
>> >> my tests with Linux and Windows guests. Of course, -rtc-td-hack flag
>> >> must be used and I also disabled HPET to be sure that RTC would be
>> >> used.
>> >>
>> >> With DEBUG_COALESCING enabled, I just get increasing numbers for
>> >> apic_irq_delivered:
>> >> apic: apic_set_irq: coalescing 67123
>> >> apic: apic_set_irq: coalescing 67124
>> >> apic: apic_set_irq: coalescing 67125
>> > So have you actually used -rtc-td-hack option? I compiled head of
>> > qemu.git with DEBUG_COALESCING and run WindowsXP guest with -rtc-td-hack
>> > and I get:
>> > apic: apic_reset_irq_delivered: old coalescing 3
>> > apic: apic_set_irq: coalescing 1
>> > apic: apic_get_irq_delivered: returning coalescing 1
>> > apic: apic_set_irq: coalescing 2
>> > apic: apic_set_irq: coalescing 3
>> > apic: apic_set_irq: coalescing 4
>> > apic: apic_set_irq: coalescing 5
>> > apic: apic_set_irq: coalescing 6
>> > apic: apic_reset_irq_delivered: old coalescing 6
>> > apic: apic_set_irq: coalescing 1
>> > apic: apic_get_irq_delivered: returning coalescing 1
>> >
>> >>
>> >> If the hack were active, the numbers would be close to zero (or at
>> >> least some point) because apic_reset_irq_delivered would be called,
>> >> but this does not happen. Could you specify a clear test case with
>> >> which the coalescing action could be tested? Linux or BSD based,
>> >> please.
>> > Linux don't use RTC as time source and I don't know about BSD, so no
>> > Linux or BSD test case for you, sorry. Run WindowXP standard HAL and put
>> > heavy load on the host. You can run video inside the gust to trigger
>> > coalescing more easily.
>>
>> I don't have Windows XP, sorry.
>>
> Will be hard to debug Windows time drift without Windows ;) Do you know
> what time source BSD uses?

Seems to be PIT. OpenBSD:
http://www.openbsd.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb/src/sys/arch/i386/isa/clock.c?rev=1.42

FreeBSD:
http://fxr.watson.org/fxr/source/x86/isa/clock.c?im=bigexcerpts

Didn't find NetBSD clock.



reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]