>>> On 10.06.15 at 13:46, <m...@redhat.com> wrote: > I don't really know. The idea would be that device > is not designed for memory to be disabled when it's > active, and starts behaving in broken ways.
But you recall that we know the origin of the offending write is in the hypervisor, and we also know that the device isn't active at the point the problem occurs? Jan
