On April 29, 2016 3:14 PM, Jan Beulich <jbeul...@suse.com> wrote:
> >>> On 29.04.16 at 04:41, <quan...@intel.com> wrote:
> > Now I check the status in caller to make the print include caller
> > which is failed, instead print in iommu_flush_all().
> > i.e.,
> > vtd_crash_shutdown()
> > {
> > ..
> > if ( iommu_flush_all() )
> > printk(XENLOG_WARNING VTDPREFIX
> > " vtd_crash_shutdown: IOMMU flush all failed.\n"); ..
> > }
> >
> > I am afraid I still don't get the point. To be honest, in such a fix,
> > The print is not so useful to me ( Correct me, I will continue to
> > enhance it).
>
> So do you think it would be more useful to leave the admin with no clue why a
> system misbehaves, instead of providing clear indication?
> IOW - what usefulness concerns do you have?
>
Jan, I will follow your suggestion for v3. I look forward to hearing the other
CCed maintainers' opinions on this.
...
i.e., In above case, in case I am an admin, I may be much more interested in
what causes vt-d crash,
keeping quite during crash. It is just a matter of my personal preference.
Ignore me.
...
Quan
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xen.org
http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
