On Mon, Mar 09, 2015 at 02:50:42PM +0800, Chen, Tiejun wrote:
> On 2015/3/6 20:59, Wei Liu wrote:
> >On Fri, Mar 06, 2015 at 05:18:36PM +0800, Chen, Tiejun wrote:
> >>On 2015/3/6 17:08, Tiejun Chen wrote:
> >>>Although we already have 'gfx_passthru' in b_info, this doesn' suffice
> >>>after we want
On 2015/3/6 20:59, Wei Liu wrote:
On Fri, Mar 06, 2015 at 05:18:36PM +0800, Chen, Tiejun wrote:
On 2015/3/6 17:08, Tiejun Chen wrote:
Although we already have 'gfx_passthru' in b_info, this doesn' suffice
after we want to handle IGD specifically. Now we define a new field of
type, gfx_passthru_
On Fri, Mar 06, 2015 at 05:18:36PM +0800, Chen, Tiejun wrote:
> On 2015/3/6 17:08, Tiejun Chen wrote:
> >Although we already have 'gfx_passthru' in b_info, this doesn' suffice
> >after we want to handle IGD specifically. Now we define a new field of
> >type, gfx_passthru_kind, to indicate we're try
On 2015/3/6 17:08, Tiejun Chen wrote:
Although we already have 'gfx_passthru' in b_info, this doesn' suffice
after we want to handle IGD specifically. Now we define a new field of
type, gfx_passthru_kind, to indicate we're trying to pass IGD. Actually
this means we can benefit this to support oth
