On Thu, 2019-02-07 at 13:09 -0800, Raj, Ashok wrote: > You are right.. they are completely orthogonal. We just don't have > a way to handle the page-requests for request without PASID's. > > There are some of the vIOMMU work to pass the PRI to who owns > the device, and we can certainly relax it then. This is just to reflect > what support exists today. FWIW, even the native driver maybe be able > to resolve this if supported.
As things stand, if a device makes a PRI request without a PASID, it'll get told that we didn't manage to bring the page in for it. Which is true. What's the actual problem being fixed by this patch? Yes, we're going to want to hook up a way to pass the PRI to the right place... but why add *another* thing that's just going to have to be fixed, by reverting this patch?
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
