On 11/07/2016 09:41, Peter Xu wrote: > As mentioned in previous email, before Marcel's patches, > vtd_host_dma_iommu() was named q35_host_dma_iommu(). At that time, I > need "find_add_as" to let Q35 codes get rid of direct calls to VT-d > (so that pc_q35.c will not need to include "intel_iommu.h" any more, > instead, it should include "x86-iommu.h"). Also, that interface is > prepared for future AMD as well. However, now AMD (you patches) are > directly calling pci_setup_iommu(). I am not sure whether you were > using it from the beginning, but IIUC as long as you are using > pci_setup_iommu() interface, we should be able to avoid providing > find_add_as any more. So I think this patch is indeed okay to be > dropped... Please kindly correct me if I missed anything. :) > > The only reason that we keep this patch (as far as I can think of..) > is that mst has done some testing on v11 and I'm not sure whether we'd > better keep it untouched if we are going to merge it (fixing commit > message does not count, right?). But I'd say I'm not familiar with how > maintainers manage codes to be merged... Maybe different maintainers > have their own flavor on this matter? I don't know. Anyway, these are > only my wild guess. > > For the problem you have encountered with IOAPIC, do you think it's > related to this patch? Have you tried to add some logs in e.g. > ioapic_service() to see what's wrong in there?
You can send v12. mst will choose whether to merge v11 or v12. Paolo