On 12/04/2024 9:31 am, Teddy Astie wrote: > Le 11/04/2024 à 22:05, Andrew Cooper a écrit : >> On 08/04/2024 2:02 pm, Teddy Astie wrote: >>> All hardware that supports VT-d/AMD-Vi that exists also supports cx16 (aside >>> specifically crafted virtual machines). >>> >>> Some IOMMU code paths in Xen consider cases where VT-d/AMD-Vi is supported >>> while cx16 isn't, those paths may be bugged and are barely tested, dead code >>> in practice. >>> >>> Disable IOMMU in case we have IOMMU hardware but no cx16, then cleanup >>> no-cx16 handling logic from VT-d and AMD-Vi drivers. >>> >>> Teddy >>> >>> Changed in v2: >>> >>> * Added cleanup no-cx16 code for x2APIC >>> * Fixed commit and code formatting >>> * Added missing Suggested-by note >>> >>> Teddy Astie (3): >>> VT-d: Disable IOMMU if cx16 isn't supported >>> AMD-Vi: Disable IOMMU if cx16 isn't supported >>> VT-d: Cleanup MAP_SINGLE_DEVICE and related code >>> >>> xen/arch/x86/apic.c | 6 ++ >>> xen/drivers/passthrough/amd/iommu_map.c | 42 ++++------ >>> xen/drivers/passthrough/amd/pci_amd_iommu.c | 6 ++ >>> xen/drivers/passthrough/vtd/intremap.c | 65 ++++----------- >>> xen/drivers/passthrough/vtd/iommu.c | 92 +++++++-------------- >>> xen/drivers/passthrough/vtd/vtd.h | 5 +- >>> 6 files changed, 71 insertions(+), 145 deletions(-) >>> >> Sorry, but you've sent out two copies of each patch in this series, and >> it's not clear if they're identical or not. >> >> Please could you send out another version, making sure there's only one >> of each patch. >> >> Also, you need to swap ENOSYS with ENODEV, as per Jan's review on v1. >> >> Thanks, >> >> ~Andrew > Hello, > > Not entirely sure why it got sent twice, as marek said he only received > it once. Will double-check next time to avoid this issue in case I > wrongfully sent it twice.
Huh, lore agrees. I seem to have both a direct and list copy which weren't correctly deduplicated. Sorry for the noise. > Will also swap ENOSYS with ENODEV in the next version. Thanks. ~Andrew
