>>> On 29.09.16 at 17:11, wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 29, 2016 at 07:55:00AM -0600, Jan Beulich wrote:
>> >>> On 27.09.16 at 17:57, wrote:
>> > Instead of being tied to the presence of an IOMMU
>>
>> At the very least I'd expect the "why" aspect to get mentioned
>> here.
>
> TBH, it seems simpler to h
On Thu, Sep 29, 2016 at 07:55:00AM -0600, Jan Beulich wrote:
> >>> On 27.09.16 at 17:57, wrote:
> > Instead of being tied to the presence of an IOMMU
>
> At the very least I'd expect the "why" aspect to get mentioned
> here.
TBH, it seems simpler to have it there rather than conditional to the
>>> On 27.09.16 at 17:57, wrote:
> Instead of being tied to the presence of an IOMMU
At the very least I'd expect the "why" aspect to get mentioned
here.
> --- a/xen/drivers/passthrough/amd/pci_amd_iommu.c
> +++ b/xen/drivers/passthrough/amd/pci_amd_iommu.c
> @@ -219,7 +219,8 @@ int __init amd_i
Instead of being tied to the presence of an IOMMU
Signed-off-by: Roger Pau Monné
Suggested-by: Andrew Cooper
---
Cc: Jan Beulich
Cc: Andrew Cooper
Cc: Suravee Suthikulpanit
Cc: Kevin Tian
Cc: Feng Wu
---
xen/arch/x86/setup.c| 2 ++
xen/drivers/passthrough/amd/pci_am
