Friday, April 24, 2015, 4:12:42 PM, you wrote:
On 24.04.15 at 16:05, wrote:
>> I see you commited "AMD IOMMU: only translate remapped IO-APIC RTEs" to
>> staging,
>> any reason why your patch in
>> http://lists.xen.org/archives/html/xen-devel/2015-04/msg02253.html
>> isn't commited yet ?
>>> On 24.04.15 at 16:05, wrote:
> I see you commited "AMD IOMMU: only translate remapped IO-APIC RTEs" to
> staging,
> any reason why your patch in
> http://lists.xen.org/archives/html/xen-devel/2015-04/msg02253.html
> isn't commited yet ?
>
> (still waiting for an formal ack from someone ? a
Friday, April 24, 2015, 12:12:32 AM, you wrote:
> On 4/23/15, 12:59, "Sander Eikelenboom" wrote:
>>
>>> On 4/23/15, 08:47, "Jan Beulich" wrote:
>>
>>> On 23.04.15 at 15:31, wrote:
>
> On 4/17/15, 10:27, "Jan Beulich" wrote:
>
>>1aeb1156fa ("x86 don't change affin
On 4/23/15, 13:06, "Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk" wrote:
>>I have tested this patch w/ staging branch booting Dom0, and this patch
>>got rid of the following error from xl dmesg:
>>(XEN) APIC error on CPU0: 00(40)
>>(XEN) APIC error on CPU2: 00(40)
>>However, when I tried starting a guest w/ PCI devic
On 4/23/15, 12:59, "Sander Eikelenboom" wrote:
>
>> On 4/23/15, 08:47, "Jan Beulich" wrote:
>
>> On 23.04.15 at 15:31, wrote:
>>>
On 4/17/15, 10:27, "Jan Beulich" wrote:
>1aeb1156fa ("x86 don't change affinity with interrupt unmasked")
>introducing RTE reads prio
On Thu, Apr 23, 2015 at 05:51:05PM +, Suthikulpanit, Suravee wrote:
>
>
> On 4/23/15, 08:47, "Jan Beulich" wrote:
>
> On 23.04.15 at 15:31, wrote:
> >
> >>
> >> On 4/17/15, 10:27, "Jan Beulich" wrote:
> >>
> >>>1aeb1156fa ("x86 don't change affinity with interrupt unmasked")
> >>>i
> On 4/23/15, 08:47, "Jan Beulich" wrote:
> On 23.04.15 at 15:31, wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> On 4/17/15, 10:27, "Jan Beulich" wrote:
>>>
1aeb1156fa ("x86 don't change affinity with interrupt unmasked")
introducing RTE reads prior to the respective interrupt having got
enabled for the
On 4/23/15, 08:47, "Jan Beulich" wrote:
On 23.04.15 at 15:31, wrote:
>
>>
>> On 4/17/15, 10:27, "Jan Beulich" wrote:
>>
>>>1aeb1156fa ("x86 don't change affinity with interrupt unmasked")
>>>introducing RTE reads prior to the respective interrupt having got
>>>enabled for the first tim
>>> On 23.04.15 at 15:31, wrote:
>
> On 4/17/15, 10:27, "Jan Beulich" wrote:
>
>>1aeb1156fa ("x86 don't change affinity with interrupt unmasked")
>>introducing RTE reads prior to the respective interrupt having got
>>enabled for the first time uncovered a bug in 2ca9fbd739 ("AMD IOMMU:
>>alloc
On 4/17/15, 10:27, "Jan Beulich" wrote:
>1aeb1156fa ("x86 don't change affinity with interrupt unmasked")
>introducing RTE reads prior to the respective interrupt having got
>enabled for the first time uncovered a bug in 2ca9fbd739 ("AMD IOMMU:
>allocate IRTE entries instead of using a static m
1aeb1156fa ("x86 don't change affinity with interrupt unmasked")
introducing RTE reads prior to the respective interrupt having got
enabled for the first time uncovered a bug in 2ca9fbd739 ("AMD IOMMU:
allocate IRTE entries instead of using a static mapping"): We obviously
shouldn't be translating
11 matches
Mail list logo
