On Thu, 2016-03-24 at 13:57 +0800, Quan Xu wrote: > If Device-TLB flush timed out, we would hide the target ATS > device and crash the domain owning this ATS device. If impacted > domain is hardware domain, just throw out a warning. > > The hidden device should be disallowed to be further assigned > to any domain. > What is "should be disallowed" supposed to mean here? Isn't the situation that, by hiding the device, which this patch is doing, we actually disallow any further assignment?
If yes, this should rather be (something like): "By hiding the device, we make sure it can't be assigned to any domain any longer." Other than this, the patch looks good to me, but I'll re-review it when the new version comes out (with the other patches from the preliminary series folded in), before saying Reviewed-by. Regards, Dario -- <<This happens because I choose it to happen!>> (Raistlin Majere) ----------------------------------------------------------------- Dario Faggioli, Ph.D, http://about.me/dario.faggioli Senior Software Engineer, Citrix Systems R&D Ltd., Cambridge (UK)
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
_______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xen.org http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
