"Michael S. Tsirkin" <m...@redhat.com> writes: > 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.
Yes, will do. Thanks.
