>>> On 14.01.16 at 11:29, <quan...@intel.com> wrote:
> On 14.01.2016 at 5:04pm, <jbeul...@suse.com> wrote:
>> >>> On 14.01.16 at 02:59, <quan...@intel.com> wrote:
>> > On 14.01.2016 at 12:58am, <jbeul...@suse.com> wrote:
>> >> >>> On 23.12.15 at 09:25, <quan...@intel.com> wrote:
>> >> > --- a/xen/drivers/passthrough/vtd/qinval.c
>> >> > +++ b/xen/drivers/passthrough/vtd/qinval.c
>> >> > @@ -28,6 +28,11 @@
>> >> > #include "vtd.h"
>> >> > #include "extern.h"
>> >> >
>> >> > +static int __read_mostly iommu_qi_timeout_ms = 1;
>> >> > +integer_param("iommu_qi_timeout_ms", iommu_qi_timeout_ms);
>> >>
>> >> But wait - this needs to be accompanied by an entry in
>> >> docs/misc/xen-command-line.markdown.
>> >>
>> >
>> > Jan, Is the following right?
>>
>> No - you appear to add to the "iommu" option description. Either you need to
>> change the implementation to match that (which probably would be a good
>> idea, as that's what "iommu" is being used for in other cases), or you need
> to
>> add a new standalone entry with the correct option name.
>>
>
> I prefer to add a new standalone entry.
> Maybe I can modify the option name from "iommu_qi_timeout_ms" to
> "qi_timeout_ms".
vtd-qi-timeout-ms might be okay, but qi as the prefix is bad. The
trailing ms may also not be needed.
Jan
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xen.org
http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
