On April 26, 2016 6:53 PM, Jan Beulich wrote:
> >>> On 26.04.16 at 12:15, wrote:
> > On April 26, 2016 5:11 PM, Jan Beulich wrote:
> >> >>> On 26.04.16 at 04:18, wrote:
> >> > On April 25, 2016 5:22 PM, Jan Beulich wrote:
> >> >> >>> On 18.04.16 at 16:00, wrote:
> >> >> > --- a/xen/drivers/pa
>>> On 26.04.16 at 12:15, wrote:
> On April 26, 2016 5:11 PM, Jan Beulich wrote:
>> >>> On 26.04.16 at 04:18, wrote:
>> > On April 25, 2016 5:22 PM, Jan Beulich wrote:
>> >> >>> On 18.04.16 at 16:00, wrote:
>> >> > --- a/xen/drivers/passthrough/vtd/iommu.c
>> >> > +++ b/xen/drivers/passthrough
On April 26, 2016 5:11 PM, Jan Beulich wrote:
> >>> On 26.04.16 at 04:18, wrote:
> > On April 25, 2016 5:22 PM, Jan Beulich wrote:
> >> >>> On 18.04.16 at 16:00, wrote:
> >> > --- a/xen/drivers/passthrough/vtd/iommu.c
> >> > +++ b/xen/drivers/passthrough/vtd/iommu.c
> >> > @@ -558,14 +558,16 @@
>>> On 26.04.16 at 04:18, wrote:
> On April 25, 2016 5:22 PM, Jan Beulich wrote:
>> >>> On 18.04.16 at 16:00, wrote:
>> > --- a/xen/drivers/passthrough/vtd/iommu.c
>> > +++ b/xen/drivers/passthrough/vtd/iommu.c
>> > @@ -558,14 +558,16 @@ static void iommu_flush_all(void)
>> > }
>> > }
>> >
On April 25, 2016 5:22 PM, Jan Beulich wrote:
> >>> On 18.04.16 at 16:00, wrote:
> > --- a/xen/drivers/passthrough/vtd/iommu.c
> > +++ b/xen/drivers/passthrough/vtd/iommu.c
> > @@ -558,14 +558,16 @@ static void iommu_flush_all(void)
> > }
> > }
> >
> > -static void __intel_iommu_iotlb_flush
On April 25, 2016 5:22 PM, Jan Beulich wrote:
> >>> On 18.04.16 at 16:00, wrote:
>
> I thought we had agreed on best effort flushing when an error occurs. That
> means you shouldn't break out of the loop here, but accumulate errors.
> (Breaking out of the loop would be okay if it was conditional
>>> On 18.04.16 at 16:00, wrote:
> --- a/xen/drivers/passthrough/vtd/iommu.c
> +++ b/xen/drivers/passthrough/vtd/iommu.c
> @@ -558,14 +558,16 @@ static void iommu_flush_all(void)
> }
> }
>
> -static void __intel_iommu_iotlb_flush(struct domain *d, unsigned long gfn,
> -int dma_old_
On April 19, 2016 2:33pm, Tian, Kevin wrote:
> > From: Xu, Quan
> > Sent: Monday, April 18, 2016 10:00 PM
> >
> > The propagation value from IOMMU flush interfaces may be positive,
> > which indicates callers need to flush cache, not one of faliures.
> >
> > when the propagation value is positive,
> From: Xu, Quan
> Sent: Monday, April 18, 2016 10:00 PM
>
> The propagation value from IOMMU flush interfaces may be positive, which
> indicates callers need to flush cache, not one of faliures.
>
> when the propagation value is positive, this patch fixes this flush issue
> as follows:
> - cal
