Will Deacon wrote:
I don't agree. We're making sensible use of a vendor prefix to isolate errata workarounds. The description clearly states that the implementation is buggy.
Yeah, but I'm disappointed that the patch doesn't explain the exact bug that necessitates the property. I think that's an important clue for others to determine whether they would ever need this work-around.
Given that there aren't any Calxeda engineers left working on this stuff, I'm heavily inclined to leave this patch as-is.
Fair enough. _______________________________________________ iommu mailing list iommu@lists.linux-foundation.org https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/iommu
