On Tue, Oct 19, 2021 at 04:39:20PM +0100, Jean-Philippe Brucker wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 18, 2021 at 11:25:05AM -0400, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> > On Fri, Oct 08, 2021 at 04:17:37PM +0100, Jean-Philippe Brucker wrote:
> > > On Tue, Oct 05, 2021 at 11:45:42AM -0400, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> > > > L
On Mon, Oct 18, 2021 at 11:25:05AM -0400, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 08, 2021 at 04:17:37PM +0100, Jean-Philippe Brucker wrote:
> > On Tue, Oct 05, 2021 at 11:45:42AM -0400, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> > > Looks like this can not be applied yet because the bypass bit
> > > isn't in yet
On Fri, Oct 08, 2021 at 04:17:37PM +0100, Jean-Philippe Brucker wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 05, 2021 at 11:45:42AM -0400, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> > Looks like this can not be applied yet because the bypass bit
> > isn't in yet. what's up with that?
>
> The boot-bypass bit isn't a hard dependency for
On Tue, Oct 12, 2021 at 1:34 AM Jean-Philippe Brucker
wrote:
>
> Hi Haiwei,
>
> On Mon, Oct 11, 2021 at 06:10:07PM +0800, Haiwei Li wrote:
> [...]
> > Gave up waiting for root file system device. Common problems:
> > - Boot args (cat /proc/cmdline)
> >- Check rootdelay= (did the system wait
Hi Haiwei,
On Mon, Oct 11, 2021 at 06:10:07PM +0800, Haiwei Li wrote:
[...]
> Gave up waiting for root file system device. Common problems:
> - Boot args (cat /proc/cmdline)
>- Check rootdelay= (did the system wait long enough?)
> - Missing modules (cat /proc/modules; ls /dev)
> ALERT! UUI
On Fri, Oct 8, 2021 at 11:18 PM Jean-Philippe Brucker
wrote:
>
> On Tue, Oct 05, 2021 at 11:45:42AM -0400, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> > Looks like this can not be applied yet because the bypass bit
> > isn't in yet. what's up with that?
>
> The boot-bypass bit isn't a hard dependency for this ser
On Tue, Oct 05, 2021 at 11:45:42AM -0400, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> Looks like this can not be applied yet because the bypass bit
> isn't in yet. what's up with that?
The boot-bypass bit isn't a hard dependency for this series, but it will
be needed for full support eventually. It will be delaye
Looks like this can not be applied yet because the bypass bit
isn't in yet. what's up with that?
--
MST
Allow instantiating a virtio-iommu device on ACPI systems by adding a
Virtual I/O Translation table (VIOT). Enable x86 support for VIOT.
Changes since v3 [1]:
* Cleaned the IOMMU-uniqueness checks. Added patch 6 to have a
single check on x86.
* Added patch 5 that allows to gracefully propagate e
