On 2016-07-06 08:44, Valentine Sinitsyn wrote: > On 06.07.2016 11:28, Jan Kiszka wrote: >> On 2016-07-05 20:49, Valentine Sinitsyn wrote: > [...] >>> The expected behavior would be not to remap these entries, of course. >>> However, they aren't masked (which is what I'd expect), and adding >>> another "address != 0" check seems like a hack. >> >> We are pretty strict right now with the configuration migration during >> jailhouse enable. We could relax that, only warn about "blocking invalid >> vector X of device Y", do not configure a route and continue. When a > Yes, this makes sense - probably I'll implement this. Do you think a > BIOS update could fix the issue on this particular board (haven't tried > yet)?
I wouldn't bet on the BIOS only. Maybe the device [firmware] already fails to reset the mask bits properly. Jan -- Siemens AG, Corporate Technology, CT RDA ITP SES-DE Corporate Competence Center Embedded Linux -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Jailhouse" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
