Hi,
On 12/25/19 10:05 AM, Jim,Yan wrote:
Hi,
-----邮件原件-----
发件人: Lu Baolu [mailto:[email protected]]
发送时间: 2019年12月25日 10:01
收件人: Jim,Yan <[email protected]>; Jerry Snitselaar <[email protected]>
抄送: [email protected]; [email protected]
主题: Re: 答复: 答复: 答复: 答复: [PATCH] iommu/vt-d: Don't reject nvme
host due to scope mismatch
Hi,
On 2019/12/25 9:52, Jim,Yan wrote:
Hi,
-----邮件原件-----
发件人: Lu Baolu [mailto:[email protected]]
发送时间: 2019年12月24日 19:27
收件人: Jim,Yan <[email protected]>; Jerry Snitselaar
<[email protected]>
抄送: [email protected]; [email protected]
主题: Re: 答复: 答复: 答复: [PATCH] iommu/vt-d: Don't reject nvme host
due to
scope mismatch
Hi,
On 2019/12/24 16:18, Jim,Yan wrote:
For both cases, a quirk flag seems to be more reasonable, so that
unrelated devices will not be impacted.
Best regards,
baolu
Hi Baolu,
Thanks for your advice. And I modify the patch as follow.
I just posted a patch for both NTG and NVME cases. Can you please
take a
look?
Does it work for you?
Best regards,
baolu
I have tested your patch. It does work for me. But I prefer my
second version,
it is more flexible, and may use for similar unknown devices.
I didn't get your point. Do you mind explaining why it's more flexible?
Best regards,
Baolu
For example, an unknown device has a normal PCI header and bridge scope
and a class of PCI_CLASS_BRIDGE_PCI.
These devices do have a class of PCI_BASE_CLASS_BRIDGE in common.
This is not a common case. It's only for devices on the marketing and hard for
the VT-d users to get it fixed in the OEM firmware.
Best regards,
Baolu
Got it. Then I am OK with this patch. I have tested it yesterday. It does work
for me.
Thanks.
Can I add your Tested-by?
Best regards,
baolu
_______________________________________________
iommu mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/iommu
