| Message ID | 54C981B4.5070205@intel.com |
|---|---|
| State | New |
| Headers | show |
On Thu, Jan 29, 2015 at 08:41:24AM +0800, Chen, Tiejun wrote: > On 2015/1/28 19:12, Wei Liu wrote: > >On Wed, Jan 28, 2015 at 08:42:56AM +0800, Chen, Tiejun wrote: > >>On 2015/1/27 22:40, Ian Jackson wrote: > >>>Chen, Tiejun writes ("Re: [Qemu-devel] [RFC][PATCH 1/1] libxl: add one machine property to support IGD GFX passthrough"): > >>>>On 2015/1/23 8:43, Chen, Tiejun wrote: > >>>>>On 2015/1/22 8:51, Chen, Tiejun wrote: > >>>>>>At this point I just concern here if we still use 'gfx_passthrou', at > >>>>>>least it may look like a backward compatibility with older versions of > >>>>>>qemu in Xen side, qemu-xen-traditional. But I'd like to follow your > >>>>>>final option. > >>>... > >>>>>Any feedback to this option I should follow here? > >>>> > >>>>Ping... > >>> > >>>I think this is a question that qemu upstream should answer. > >>> > >> > >>Actually this is just commented by Gerd in qemu upstream. So now looks in > >>Xen side you guys don't have any objection to use 'igd-passthru' as well. If > >>yes, I'm fine to adopt this. > >> > > > >Yes, we would like to stay in line with upstream. > > Wei, > > Thanks for your response. > > > > >Just remember to handle old option in libxl if your old option is already > >released by some older version of QEMUs. > > I just drop that old option, -gfx_passthru, if we're under qemu upstream > circumstance, like this, > The question is, is there any version of qemu upstream that has been released that has the old option (-gfx-passthru)? This gives us a situation that we need to support both the old (-gfx-passthru) and new (-igd-passthru) options. Presumably we (libxl) would need to fork a qemu process to determine which option it has and pass the right one. Or you can try to keep both old and new option at the same time but deprecate the old one. Then in a few qemu release cycles later (or probably one year or two?) you can finally remove the old one. The point is that to give downstream (in this case, Xen) time to cope with the change. > --- a/tools/libxl/libxl_dm.c > +++ b/tools/libxl/libxl_dm.c > @@ -318,7 +318,10 @@ static char ** > libxl__build_device_model_args_old(libxl__gc *gc, > flexarray_vappend(dm_args, "-net", "none", NULL); > } > if (libxl_defbool_val(b_info->u.hvm.gfx_passthru)) { > - flexarray_append(dm_args, "-gfx_passthru"); > + if (b_info->device_model_version != > + LIBXL_DEVICE_MODEL_VERSION_QEMU_XEN) { > + flexarray_append(dm_args, "-gfx_passthru"); > + } I don't think this is right if upstream qemu also supports gfx-passthru. However, you're modifying libxl__build_device_model_args_old, it strongly suggests that it only affects qemu-trad. That means you don't even need this patch... Wei. > } > } else { > if (!sdl && !vnc) > @@ -702,7 +705,10 @@ static char ** > libxl__build_device_model_args_new(libxl__gc *gc, > flexarray_append(dm_args, "none"); > } > if (libxl_defbool_val(b_info->u.hvm.gfx_passthru)) { > - flexarray_append(dm_args, "-gfx_passthru"); > + if (b_info->device_model_version != > + LIBXL_DEVICE_MODEL_VERSION_QEMU_XEN) { > + flexarray_append(dm_args, "-gfx_passthru"); > + } > } > } else { > if (!sdl && !vnc) { > > Is this good enough? > > Thanks > Tiejun
On 2015/1/29 18:50, Wei Liu wrote: > On Thu, Jan 29, 2015 at 08:41:24AM +0800, Chen, Tiejun wrote: >> On 2015/1/28 19:12, Wei Liu wrote: >>> On Wed, Jan 28, 2015 at 08:42:56AM +0800, Chen, Tiejun wrote: >>>> On 2015/1/27 22:40, Ian Jackson wrote: >>>>> Chen, Tiejun writes ("Re: [Qemu-devel] [RFC][PATCH 1/1] libxl: add one machine property to support IGD GFX passthrough"): >>>>>> On 2015/1/23 8:43, Chen, Tiejun wrote: >>>>>>> On 2015/1/22 8:51, Chen, Tiejun wrote: >>>>>>>> At this point I just concern here if we still use 'gfx_passthrou', at >>>>>>>> least it may look like a backward compatibility with older versions of >>>>>>>> qemu in Xen side, qemu-xen-traditional. But I'd like to follow your >>>>>>>> final option. >>>>> ... >>>>>>> Any feedback to this option I should follow here? >>>>>> >>>>>> Ping... >>>>> >>>>> I think this is a question that qemu upstream should answer. >>>>> >>>> >>>> Actually this is just commented by Gerd in qemu upstream. So now looks in >>>> Xen side you guys don't have any objection to use 'igd-passthru' as well. If >>>> yes, I'm fine to adopt this. >>>> >>> >>> Yes, we would like to stay in line with upstream. >> >> Wei, >> >> Thanks for your response. >> >>> >>> Just remember to handle old option in libxl if your old option is already >>> released by some older version of QEMUs. >> >> I just drop that old option, -gfx_passthru, if we're under qemu upstream >> circumstance, like this, >> > > The question is, is there any version of qemu upstream that has > been released that has the old option (-gfx-passthru)? No. Just now we're starting to support IGD passthrough in qemu upstream. > > This gives us a situation that we need to support both the old > (-gfx-passthru) and new (-igd-passthru) options. Presumably we (libxl) > would need to fork a qemu process to determine which option it has and > pass the right one. > > Or you can try to keep both old and new option at the same time but Yeah, actually I also have considered to keep both two options at the same time. Its really friendly to any qemu version. > deprecate the old one. Then in a few qemu release cycles later (or This should be like 'accel=kvm' versus 'enable-kvm' in qemu upstream. They're coexisted now but just the former is a modern option. > probably one year or two?) you can finally remove the old one. The point > is that to give downstream (in this case, Xen) time to cope with the > change. Here I'm fine to this way. So Gerd, What about this? > >> --- a/tools/libxl/libxl_dm.c >> +++ b/tools/libxl/libxl_dm.c >> @@ -318,7 +318,10 @@ static char ** >> libxl__build_device_model_args_old(libxl__gc *gc, >> flexarray_vappend(dm_args, "-net", "none", NULL); >> } >> if (libxl_defbool_val(b_info->u.hvm.gfx_passthru)) { >> - flexarray_append(dm_args, "-gfx_passthru"); >> + if (b_info->device_model_version != >> + LIBXL_DEVICE_MODEL_VERSION_QEMU_XEN) { >> + flexarray_append(dm_args, "-gfx_passthru"); >> + } > > I don't think this is right if upstream qemu also supports gfx-passthru. > > However, you're modifying libxl__build_device_model_args_old, it > strongly suggests that it only affects qemu-trad. That means you don't > even need this patch... You're right and thanks. Thanks Tiejun > > Wei. > >> } >> } else { >> if (!sdl && !vnc) >> @@ -702,7 +705,10 @@ static char ** >> libxl__build_device_model_args_new(libxl__gc *gc, >> flexarray_append(dm_args, "none"); >> } >> if (libxl_defbool_val(b_info->u.hvm.gfx_passthru)) { >> - flexarray_append(dm_args, "-gfx_passthru"); >> + if (b_info->device_model_version != >> + LIBXL_DEVICE_MODEL_VERSION_QEMU_XEN) { >> + flexarray_append(dm_args, "-gfx_passthru"); >> + } >> } >> } else { >> if (!sdl && !vnc) { >> >> Is this good enough? >> >> Thanks >> Tiejun >
On Fri, Jan 30, 2015 at 08:56:48AM +0800, Chen, Tiejun wrote: [...] > >>> > >>>Just remember to handle old option in libxl if your old option is already > >>>released by some older version of QEMUs. > >> > >>I just drop that old option, -gfx_passthru, if we're under qemu upstream > >>circumstance, like this, > >> > > > >The question is, is there any version of qemu upstream that has > >been released that has the old option (-gfx-passthru)? > > No. Just now we're starting to support IGD passthrough in qemu upstream. > Right, as of QEMU 2.2.0 there's no support of IGD passthrough in QMEU upstream. > > > >This gives us a situation that we need to support both the old > >(-gfx-passthru) and new (-igd-passthru) options. Presumably we (libxl) > >would need to fork a qemu process to determine which option it has and > >pass the right one. > > > >Or you can try to keep both old and new option at the same time but > > Yeah, actually I also have considered to keep both two options at the same > time. Its really friendly to any qemu version. > > >deprecate the old one. Then in a few qemu release cycles later (or > > This should be like 'accel=kvm' versus 'enable-kvm' in qemu upstream. > They're coexisted now but just the former is a modern option. > > >probably one year or two?) you can finally remove the old one. The point > >is that to give downstream (in this case, Xen) time to cope with the > >change. > > Here I'm fine to this way. > > So Gerd, > So you don't actually need to ask Gerd this question because there is no old option to keep in qemu upstream. Libxl (or any sensible toolstack) will just do the right thing to either pass -igd-passthru (or whatever you guys agree upon) to qemu upstream or pass -gfx-passthru to qemu traditional. :-) Wei. > What about this? >
> -----Original Message----- > From: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org > [mailto:xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org] On Behalf Of Wei Liu > Sent: Friday, January 30, 2015 8:26 PM > To: Chen, Tiejun > Cc: Wei Liu; ian.campbell@citrix.com; mst@redhat.com; Ian Jackson; > qemu-devel@nongnu.org; xen-devel@lists.xen.org; Gerd Hoffmann > Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] [Qemu-devel] [RFC][PATCH 1/1] libxl: add one machine > property to support IGD GFX passthrough > > On Fri, Jan 30, 2015 at 08:56:48AM +0800, Chen, Tiejun wrote: > [...] > > >>> > > >>>Just remember to handle old option in libxl if your old option is > > >>>already released by some older version of QEMUs. > > >> > > >>I just drop that old option, -gfx_passthru, if we're under qemu > > >>upstream circumstance, like this, > > >> > > > > > >The question is, is there any version of qemu upstream that has been > > >released that has the old option (-gfx-passthru)? > > > > No. Just now we're starting to support IGD passthrough in qemu upstream. > > > > Right, as of QEMU 2.2.0 there's no support of IGD passthrough in QMEU > upstream. > Just a question: Now what features do vt-d support? Thanks. -Quan > > > > > >This gives us a situation that we need to support both the old > > >(-gfx-passthru) and new (-igd-passthru) options. Presumably we > > >(libxl) would need to fork a qemu process to determine which option > > >it has and pass the right one. > > > > > >Or you can try to keep both old and new option at the same time but > > > > Yeah, actually I also have considered to keep both two options at the > > same time. Its really friendly to any qemu version. > > > > >deprecate the old one. Then in a few qemu release cycles later (or > > > > This should be like 'accel=kvm' versus 'enable-kvm' in qemu upstream. > > They're coexisted now but just the former is a modern option. > > > > >probably one year or two?) you can finally remove the old one. The > > >point is that to give downstream (in this case, Xen) time to cope > > >with the change. > > > > Here I'm fine to this way. > > > > So Gerd, > > > > So you don't actually need to ask Gerd this question because there is no old > option to keep in qemu upstream. > > Libxl (or any sensible toolstack) will just do the right thing to either pass > -igd-passthru (or whatever you guys agree upon) to qemu upstream or pass > -gfx-passthru to qemu traditional. :-) > > Wei. > > > What about this? > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Xen-devel mailing list > Xen-devel@lists.xen.org > http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
On Sat, Jan 31, 2015 at 07:07:16AM +0000, Xu, Quan wrote: > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org > > [mailto:xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org] On Behalf Of Wei Liu > > Sent: Friday, January 30, 2015 8:26 PM > > To: Chen, Tiejun > > Cc: Wei Liu; ian.campbell@citrix.com; mst@redhat.com; Ian Jackson; > > qemu-devel@nongnu.org; xen-devel@lists.xen.org; Gerd Hoffmann > > Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] [Qemu-devel] [RFC][PATCH 1/1] libxl: add one machine > > property to support IGD GFX passthrough > > > > On Fri, Jan 30, 2015 at 08:56:48AM +0800, Chen, Tiejun wrote: > > [...] > > > >>> > > > >>>Just remember to handle old option in libxl if your old option is > > > >>>already released by some older version of QEMUs. > > > >> > > > >>I just drop that old option, -gfx_passthru, if we're under qemu > > > >>upstream circumstance, like this, > > > >> > > > > > > > >The question is, is there any version of qemu upstream that has been > > > >released that has the old option (-gfx-passthru)? > > > > > > No. Just now we're starting to support IGD passthrough in qemu upstream. > > > > > > > Right, as of QEMU 2.2.0 there's no support of IGD passthrough in QMEU > > upstream. > > > > Just a question: > Now what features do vt-d support? Thanks. > I don't know whether vt-d is supported in qemu upstream. But if there is support in upstream and you want to change some options, the same principle in my previous email still applies. Wei.
> -----Original Message----- > From: Wei Liu [mailto:wei.liu2@citrix.com] > Sent: Saturday, January 31, 2015 10:33 PM > To: Xu, Quan > Cc: Wei Liu; Chen, Tiejun; ian.campbell@citrix.com; mst@redhat.com; Ian Jackson; > qemu-devel@nongnu.org; xen-devel@lists.xen.org; Gerd Hoffmann > Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] [Qemu-devel] [RFC][PATCH 1/1] libxl: add one machine > property to support IGD GFX passthrough > > On Sat, Jan 31, 2015 at 07:07:16AM +0000, Xu, Quan wrote: > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org > > > [mailto:xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org] On Behalf Of Wei Liu > > > Sent: Friday, January 30, 2015 8:26 PM > > > To: Chen, Tiejun > > > Cc: Wei Liu; ian.campbell@citrix.com; mst@redhat.com; Ian Jackson; > > > qemu-devel@nongnu.org; xen-devel@lists.xen.org; Gerd Hoffmann > > > Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] [Qemu-devel] [RFC][PATCH 1/1] libxl: add > > > one machine property to support IGD GFX passthrough > > > > > > On Fri, Jan 30, 2015 at 08:56:48AM +0800, Chen, Tiejun wrote: > > > [...] > > > > >>> > > > > >>>Just remember to handle old option in libxl if your old option > > > > >>>is already released by some older version of QEMUs. > > > > >> > > > > >>I just drop that old option, -gfx_passthru, if we're under qemu > > > > >>upstream circumstance, like this, > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >The question is, is there any version of qemu upstream that has > > > > >been released that has the old option (-gfx-passthru)? > > > > > > > > No. Just now we're starting to support IGD passthrough in qemu upstream. > > > > > > > > > > Right, as of QEMU 2.2.0 there's no support of IGD passthrough in > > > QMEU upstream. > > > > > > > Just a question: > > Now what features do vt-d support? Thanks. > > > > I don't know whether vt-d is supported in qemu upstream. > > But if there is support in upstream and you want to change some options, the > same principle in my previous email still applies. > > Wei. Thanks. -Quan
On 2015/1/30 20:26, Wei Liu wrote: > On Fri, Jan 30, 2015 at 08:56:48AM +0800, Chen, Tiejun wrote: > [...] >>>>> >>>>> Just remember to handle old option in libxl if your old option is already >>>>> released by some older version of QEMUs. >>>> >>>> I just drop that old option, -gfx_passthru, if we're under qemu upstream >>>> circumstance, like this, >>>> >>> >>> The question is, is there any version of qemu upstream that has >>> been released that has the old option (-gfx-passthru)? >> >> No. Just now we're starting to support IGD passthrough in qemu upstream. >> > > Right, as of QEMU 2.2.0 there's no support of IGD passthrough in QMEU > upstream. > >>> >>> This gives us a situation that we need to support both the old >>> (-gfx-passthru) and new (-igd-passthru) options. Presumably we (libxl) >>> would need to fork a qemu process to determine which option it has and >>> pass the right one. >>> >>> Or you can try to keep both old and new option at the same time but >> >> Yeah, actually I also have considered to keep both two options at the same >> time. Its really friendly to any qemu version. >> >>> deprecate the old one. Then in a few qemu release cycles later (or >> >> This should be like 'accel=kvm' versus 'enable-kvm' in qemu upstream. >> They're coexisted now but just the former is a modern option. >> >>> probably one year or two?) you can finally remove the old one. The point >>> is that to give downstream (in this case, Xen) time to cope with the >>> change. >> >> Here I'm fine to this way. >> >> So Gerd, >> > > So you don't actually need to ask Gerd this question because there is no > old option to keep in qemu upstream. > > Libxl (or any sensible toolstack) will just do the right thing to either > pass -igd-passthru (or whatever you guys agree upon) to qemu upstream or > pass -gfx-passthru to qemu traditional. :-) > Okay let me try do this. Thanks Tiejun
--- a/tools/libxl/libxl_dm.c +++ b/tools/libxl/libxl_dm.c @@ -318,7 +318,10 @@ static char ** libxl__build_device_model_args_old(libxl__gc *gc, flexarray_vappend(dm_args, "-net", "none", NULL); } if (libxl_defbool_val(b_info->u.hvm.gfx_passthru)) { - flexarray_append(dm_args, "-gfx_passthru"); + if (b_info->device_model_version != + LIBXL_DEVICE_MODEL_VERSION_QEMU_XEN) { + flexarray_append(dm_args, "-gfx_passthru"); + } } } else {