On Wed, 1 Jul 2020 09:45:40 +0800
Lu Baolu wrote:
> Hi Jacob,
>
> On 7/1/20 1:34 AM, Jacob Pan wrote:
> > On Thu, 25 Jun 2020 18:10:43 +0800
> > Lu Baolu wrote:
> >
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> On 2020/6/23 23:43, Jacob Pan wrote:
> >>> For guest requested IOTLB invalidation, address and mask are
>
Hi Jacob,
On 7/1/20 1:34 AM, Jacob Pan wrote:
On Thu, 25 Jun 2020 18:10:43 +0800
Lu Baolu wrote:
Hi,
On 2020/6/23 23:43, Jacob Pan wrote:
For guest requested IOTLB invalidation, address and mask are
provided as part of the invalidation data. VT-d HW silently ignores
any address bits below t
On Thu, 25 Jun 2020 18:10:43 +0800
Lu Baolu wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 2020/6/23 23:43, Jacob Pan wrote:
> > For guest requested IOTLB invalidation, address and mask are
> > provided as part of the invalidation data. VT-d HW silently ignores
> > any address bits below the mask. SW shall also allow such
Hi,
On 2020/6/23 23:43, Jacob Pan wrote:
For guest requested IOTLB invalidation, address and mask are provided as
part of the invalidation data. VT-d HW silently ignores any address bits
below the mask. SW shall also allow such case but give warning if
address does not align with the mask. This
For guest requested IOTLB invalidation, address and mask are provided as
part of the invalidation data. VT-d HW silently ignores any address bits
below the mask. SW shall also allow such case but give warning if
address does not align with the mask. This patch relax the fault
handling from error to
