lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2019]   [Dec]   [24]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
Subject答复: 答复: 答复: 答复: 答复: 答 复: [PATCH] iommu/vt-d: Don't reject nvme ho st due to scope mismatch
Date
Hi,

> -----邮件原件-----
> 发件人: Lu Baolu [mailto:baolu.lu@linux.intel.com]
> 发送时间: 2019年12月25日 10:38
> 收件人: Jim,Yan <jimyan@baidu.com>; Jerry Snitselaar <jsnitsel@redhat.com>
> 抄送: baolu.lu@linux.intel.com; iommu@lists.linux-foundation.org;
> linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
> 主题: Re: 答复: 答复: 答复: 答复: 答复: [PATCH] iommu/vt-d: Don't reject
> nvme host due to scope mismatch
>
> Hi,
>
> On 12/25/19 10:05 AM, Jim,Yan wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> >> -----邮件原件-----
> >> 发件人: Lu Baolu [mailto:baolu.lu@linux.intel.com]
> >> 发送时间: 2019年12月25日 10:01
> >> 收件人: Jim,Yan <jimyan@baidu.com>; Jerry Snitselaar
> >> <jsnitsel@redhat.com>
> >> 抄送: iommu@lists.linux-foundation.org; linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
> >> 主题: Re: 答复: 答复: 答复: 答复: [PATCH] iommu/vt-d: Don't reject
> nvme host
> >> due to scope mismatch
> >>
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> On 2019/12/25 9:52, Jim,Yan wrote:
> >>> Hi,
> >>>
> >>>> -----邮件原件-----
> >>>> 发件人: Lu Baolu [mailto:baolu.lu@linux.intel.com]
> >>>> 发送时间: 2019年12月24日 19:27
> >>>> 收件人: Jim,Yan <jimyan@baidu.com>; Jerry Snitselaar
> >>>> <jsnitsel@redhat.com>
> >>>> 抄送: iommu@lists.linux-foundation.org; linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
> >>>> 主题: Re: 答复: 答复: 答复: [PATCH] iommu/vt-d: Don't reject nvme
> host
> >> due to
> >>>> scope mismatch
> >>>>
> >>>> Hi,
> >>>>
> >>>> On 2019/12/24 16:18, Jim,Yan wrote:
> >>>>>>>> For both cases, a quirk flag seems to be more reasonable, so
> >>>>>>>> that unrelated devices will not be impacted.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Best regards,
> >>>>>>>> baolu
> >>>>>>> Hi Baolu,
> >>>>>>> Thanks for your advice. And I modify the patch as follow.
> >>>>>> I just posted a patch for both NTG and NVME cases. Can you please
> >>>>>> take a
> >>>> look?
> >>>>>> Does it work for you?
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Best regards,
> >>>>>> baolu
> >>>>>>
> >>>>> I have tested your patch. It does work for me. But I prefer my
> >>>>> second version,
> >>>> it is more flexible, and may use for similar unknown devices.
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> I didn't get your point. Do you mind explaining why it's more flexible?
> >>>>
> >>>> Best regards,
> >>>> Baolu
> >>> For example, an unknown device has a normal PCI header and bridge
> >>> scope
> >> and a class of PCI_CLASS_BRIDGE_PCI.
> >>> These devices do have a class of PCI_BASE_CLASS_BRIDGE in common.
> >>
> >> This is not a common case. It's only for devices on the marketing and
> >> hard for the VT-d users to get it fixed in the OEM firmware.
> >>
> >> Best regards,
> >> Baolu
> >
> > Got it. Then I am OK with this patch. I have tested it yesterday. It does work
> for me.
> > Thanks.
>
> Can I add your Tested-by?
>
> Best regards,
> Baolu

Yes. Of course.

Best regards,
Jim
\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2019-12-25 03:41    [W:0.039 / U:9.712 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site