On Thu, Nov 19, 2015 at 10:00:38PM +0100, Markus Armbruster wrote: > "Michael S. Tsirkin" <m...@redhat.com> writes: > > > On Thu, Nov 19, 2015 at 03:38:03PM -0500, Bandan Das wrote: > >> "Michael S. Tsirkin" <m...@redhat.com> writes: > >> > >> > From: Bandan Das <b...@redhat.com> > >> > > >> > There's no indication of any sort that i440fx doesn't support > >> > "iommu=on" > >> > >> Oh, Markus quite didn't like this approach because this is > >> true for all other machines too. Anyway, I will keep in > >> mind to take care of this when I post a generic patch. > > > > Do you think I should revert this one then? > > The patch isn't wrong, it merely addresses only one special case of a > generic issue. Probably the most important case in practice. If I > understood Bandan correctly, he intended to drop this patch and work on > a general solution. As far as I'm concerned, you can keep this patch if > dropping it is inconvenient.
Bandan, I suggest you include the revert in your patchset when it's ready then. Maybe post 2.5. -- MST
