On Thu, 20 Jul 2017 10:02:33 +0530
Anup Patel wrote:
> Not allowing No-IOMMU mode for devices already having
> iommu_ops on their bus is very conservative.
>
> We now have IOMMU (such as ARM SMMU) which can bypass
> transcations when IOMMU is not configured for a given
On Thu, 20 Jul 2017 10:02:33 +0530
Anup Patel wrote:
> Not allowing No-IOMMU mode for devices already having
> iommu_ops on their bus is very conservative.
>
> We now have IOMMU (such as ARM SMMU) which can bypass
> transcations when IOMMU is not configured for a given
> device. In addition, it
On Thu, Jul 20, 2017 at 10:02:33AM +0530, Anup Patel wrote:
> Not allowing No-IOMMU mode for devices already having
> iommu_ops on their bus is very conservative.
>
> We now have IOMMU (such as ARM SMMU) which can bypass
> transcations when IOMMU is not configured for a given
> device. In
On Thu, Jul 20, 2017 at 10:02:33AM +0530, Anup Patel wrote:
> Not allowing No-IOMMU mode for devices already having
> iommu_ops on their bus is very conservative.
>
> We now have IOMMU (such as ARM SMMU) which can bypass
> transcations when IOMMU is not configured for a given
> device. In
Not allowing No-IOMMU mode for devices already having
iommu_ops on their bus is very conservative.
We now have IOMMU (such as ARM SMMU) which can bypass
transcations when IOMMU is not configured for a given
device. In addition, it is not necessary to have all
devices on bus to be upstream to an
Not allowing No-IOMMU mode for devices already having
iommu_ops on their bus is very conservative.
We now have IOMMU (such as ARM SMMU) which can bypass
transcations when IOMMU is not configured for a given
device. In addition, it is not necessary to have all
devices on bus to be upstream to an
6 matches
Mail list logo