On Tue, May 17, 2022 at 11:40:52AM +0100, Robin Murphy wrote: > Indeed, sorry but NAK for this being nonsense. As I've said at least once > before, if the unnecessary SAC address allocation attempt slows down your > workload, make it not do that in the first place. If you don't like the > existing command-line parameter then fine, there are plenty of other > options, it just needs to be done in a way that doesn't break x86 systems > with dodgy firmware, as my first attempt turned out to.
What broke x86? _______________________________________________ iommu mailing list iommu@lists.linux-foundation.org https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/iommu
