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

Re: [vfio-users] choosing motherboard/chipset, hardware compatibility lists



On Thu, Mar 3, 2016 at 6:36 AM, Daniel Pocock <daniel pocock pro> wrote:


On 03/03/16 13:15, Alex Williamson wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 3, 2016 at 5:33 AM, Daniel Pocock <daniel pocock pro
> <mailto:daniel pocock pro>> wrote:
>
>
>
>     After the problems with the Intel 55x0 chipset, I've been looking at how
>     to choose something that is more likely to work
>
>     I came across some lists maintained in various places:
>
>     https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_IOMMU-supporting_hardware
>       (mentions the C612 chipset but not the earlier C602?)
>
>     https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1LnGpTrXalwGVNy0PWJDURhyxa3sgqkGXmvNCIvIMenk/edit?pref=2&pli=1#gid=0
>
>     http://support.citrix.com/article/CTX131385
>     (this says HP Z800 is supported, but maybe they were testing one with
>     the newer 5520 C2 chipset)
>
>     https://www.vmware.com/resources/compatibility/search.php?deviceCategory=io
>
>     http://www.odin.com/support/extreme/
>        (mentions a few chipsets)
>
>     Are there any others that people consider useful for KVM VGA
>     passthrough?
>
>
http://vfio.blogspot.com/2015/10/intel-processors-with-acs-support.html
>
> VT-d is more in the processor than the chipset these days.  Picking the
> right processor will automatically pick the right chipset, which will be
> X79/X99 (or equivalent C-series) based.
>


Thanks for this feedback

X79 is Patsburg, appears to be equivalent[1] to C602  (HP Z420, Z620, Z820)

X99 is Wellsburg, appears to be equivalent[2] to C612 (HP Z440, Z640, Z840)

Your blog comments on the features moving from chipset to CPU.  Does
that mean that BIOS and motherboard manufacturer have less impact on
success as well, or these are still strong factors?

Is there anything you would consider to be a compelling reason to use
Wellsburg-based chipsets, or if I locate a box from the Patsburg era
that should suffice?

I suspect that since we've gotten past vendors actually providing an option to enable VT-d, there's very little they can do to screw it up, other than place RMRR requirements on devices (which is generally not a problem if you don't have an HP iLO).  I have a Z820 that works just fine for device assignment and I test it regularly with Quadro VMs.  I also have an X58 (Tylersburg ~5520) which is subject to the interrupt remapping issue and it also works just fine, so long as you opt-in to the isolation risks associated with lack of interrupt remapping.  I don't know of any feature that you'll see specifically related to VT-d in Patsburg vs Wellsburg, both have quirks for exposing ACS-equivalent isolation in the PCH root ports, though Wellsburg came later (v4.0) and therefore might need a newer kernel than Patsburg (v3.16).  Thanks,

Alex

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