From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Alex Williamson Subject: Re: [PATCH] VT-d: improve RMRR validity checking Date: Tue, 9 Mar 2010 14:57:00 -0700 Message-ID: <7162ab21003091357v32b3c58qae708301fdf2764a@mail.gmail.com> References: <4B59098B.6000108@intel.com> <4B590FA4.4000008@jp.fujitsu.com> <4B59132B.40607@intel.com> <4B59188C.50901@jp.fujitsu.com> <4B59660F.4000909@intel.com> <7162ab21003091339i4adb8669safd5e074607386a2@mail.gmail.com> <20100309213026.GA12602@phenom.dumpdata.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20100309213026.GA12602@phenom.dumpdata.com> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com To: Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk Cc: "xen-devel@lists.xensource.com" , Noboru Iwamatsu , Weidong Han , "Cihula, Joseph" , "Kay, Allen M" , "linux@eikelenboom.it" , "keir.fraser@eu.citrix.com" List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org On Tue, Mar 9, 2010 at 2:30 PM, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote: > On Tue, Mar 09, 2010 at 02:39:10PM -0700, Alex Williamson wrote: >> >> I have a system with what I consider to be a valid DRHD that's getting >> tripped up on this patch. =C2=A0The problem is that the DRHD includes an >> IOAPIC scope, where the IOAPIC is not materialized on the PCI bus. =C2= =A0I >> think Xen is being overzealous in it's validity checking and that this >> is a valid configuration. =C2=A0What do others think? =C2=A0Are IOAPICs = a > > How does upstream Linux handle this? Last I checked, it works just fine, doesn't care that the IOAPIC isn't materialized. Alex