On Mon, Jul 11, 2016 at 9:49 AM, Peter Xu <pet...@redhat.com> wrote: > On Mon, Jul 11, 2016 at 08:46:12AM +0300, David Kiarie wrote: >> On Mon, Jul 11, 2016 at 8:32 AM, Peter Xu <pet...@redhat.com> wrote: >> > On Sat, Jul 09, 2016 at 10:14:48AM +0200, Jan Kiszka wrote: >> >> On 2016-07-05 10:19, Peter Xu wrote: >> >> > Remove VT-d calls in common q35 codes. Instead, we provide a general >> >> > find_add_as() for x86-iommu type. >> >> > >> >> > Signed-off-by: Peter Xu <pet...@redhat.com> >> >> > --- >> >> > hw/i386/intel_iommu.c | 15 ++++++++------- >> >> > include/hw/i386/intel_iommu.h | 5 ----- >> >> > include/hw/i386/x86-iommu.h | 3 +++ >> >> > 3 files changed, 11 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-) >> >> >> >> You claim to remove something from "common q35 code", but I don't see >> >> changes to it. Instead, the patch introduces a method that seems to >> >> remain unused outside the implementing class (I just grep'ed your tree). >> >> Anything missing? >> > >> > Right. The commit message lost its point after I did the rebase to >> > Marcel's "-device intel_iommu" patches... Thanks for pointing it out. >> >> I think Jan is mainly asking about where the method 'find_add_as()' is >> being used. Unless I'm too missing something It doesn't seem to be >> used anywhere outside the implementing class.
Hi > > This patch can be dropped. I was just not sure whether it's the > correct time to do that. Anyway, we may still need one more patch to > cleanup this in the future, as I have mentioned in the previous email. I think there is a misunderstanding here. We (me and Jan) are basically asking did you plan to use "find_add_as" somewhere and may be missed it ? Why does x86-iommu class need "find_add_as" ? The reason is I'm not able to receive IOAPIC interrupts with AMD IOMMU basing my work on your code. We thought you'd clarify on where "find_add_as" is used or how you plan to use it. > > I see that mst is possibly not around these two days. Let me prepare a > v12 before he comes back. Thank you. > > -- peterx
