@stormi I am glad to hear there is progress, and I never doubted that there was interest and will from the Dev team, it was just stated, by Oliver himself, that the focus was mostly on the classic hypervisor features and that resources for edge cases were scarce. The numbers might not be spot on, but it was something similar.. Anyways I know you care and that the team always take interest in home-lab scenarios. And that, is why I keep recommending XCP-ng. You are good and motivated people, you care and interact with the community and you have a product that is simple in structure and free of most of the technical bureaucracy that the other ecosystems have.

And yes, this particular Intel Arc issue, is not only on XCP-ng, The intel toolbox and drivers for this platform is currently a mess for Linux.

And you are right to take home-labbers under your wing and prioritize it. As I'm sure you know, although it might not be of direct importance for revenue, they do have a huge impact on popularity. I dont think Proxmox would have had the traction it has, without them

Thank you for replying, and thank you to the team for their hard work!

@stormi I dont doubt that the team works hard. The GPU passthrough support has been of lower priority for a long time, it has been said many times before by the team and Oliver. 99 percent of the dev team is working security and basic hypervisor, and is not prioritized for edge cases. Which i guess that PCI passthrough is for GPUs Please dont ask me to dig up the sources. It has always been the case with Xen.... Proxmox, KVM and vmware has the edge there, and that should be well known. But I would in any case where PCI passthrough for edge cases like the GPU marked kind of is, is not a requirement, Always recommend XCP-ng over the others.

@JamesG Yeah, its scary that GPU passthrough still has a low priority for XCP-ng, during the boom of AI and local LLM Inferencing. I my self am starting to plan a move to Proxmox, though I do not really wish to move, cause I like XCP way better and have been with them for a long time... But that is just comfort...In the end, everything it comes down to is the capability and performance of the running VM guests.

@andriy.sultanov

@andriy.sultanov said:

@pandusen As Teddy said above, you can't passthrough a PCI bridge, so there's no PCI devices xapi shouldn't omit here.

I am not trying to pass through the bridge only the end points. The Intel arc's have 2 end points: The GPU and the Sound device. "xe pci-list" only reveals the GPU, not the sound device. (this works for nvidia and AMD)

But "going the xen-cmdline way" shouldn't break anything, that's what xe pci-disable-dom0-access does behind the scenes. What issues did you see? Which steps did you follow?

the sound device is available in the lspci list and can be passed through using CLI.
But doing so, (using CLI for passtrough) undoes everything done using xe or the passthrough gui in XO. and results in this:
https://xcp-ng.org/forum/topic/10609/xcp-ng-8.3-pci-passthrough-issue
so yes, its does break something.

@andriy.sultanov said:
I'll try to see why other devices are omitted and how this can be fixed.

Any news on this?
I have been fighting with getting an Intel Arc Pro B50 to work on Linux for months and i suspect that, the fact that the audio device isn't present, is what makes Linux fail to load the driver correctly.

Going the xen-cmdline way, seams to disable xe passthrough both in command line and in XO gui, causing all kinds of issues.

Windows seems to be able to initialise the GPU driver without the audio device, but it is in some kind of borked state. You can send workload to the GPU but the drivers are complaining about "no-pci compatibility".

XCP-ng 8.3 (latest patches)
Fedora server 44 - Kernel 7.1.5-201
on latest Arc firmware as well.