On Mon, Jun 19, 2017 at 8:42 AM, Peter Xu <pet...@redhat.com> wrote:
> Since looks like we need another post, a tiny suggestion is that we
> can also add some comment to tell the reason why we didn't really
> check it, and a trace_vtd_warn_invalid_qi_tail() tracer to show that
> spec is violated (if you see, we have two other warnings already named
> vtd_warn_ir_* which also helps on tracing spec violations).
Sure thing, I've just sent v2 with trace_vtd_warn_invalid_qi_tail and a comment.
> I'll ack the next version after it's cooked. Thanks Ladi for the