From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: "Jan Beulich" <JBeulich@suse.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/4] AMD IOMMU: don't BUG() when we don't
	have to
Date: Mon, 18 Feb 2013 07:58:51 +0000
Message-ID: <5121ED4B02000078000BF0FE@nat28.tlf.novell.com>
References: <511E6CAD02000078000BED19@nat28.tlf.novell.com>
	<511E6E3502000078000BED4A@nat28.tlf.novell.com>
	<511E71B2.7010007@oracle.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Return-path: <xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org>
In-Reply-To: <511E71B2.7010007@oracle.com>
Content-Disposition: inline
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.xen.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/xen-devel>,
	<mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xen.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Post: <mailto:xen-devel@lists.xen.org>
List-Help: <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xen.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.xen.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>,
	<mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xen.org?subject=subscribe>
Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org
Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org
To: Boris Ostrovsky <boris.ostrovsky@oracle.com>
Cc: xen-devel <xen-devel@lists.xen.org>, Sherry Hurwitz <sherry.hurwitz@amd.com>
List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org

>>> On 15.02.13 at 18:34, Boris Ostrovsky <boris.ostrovsky@oracle.com> wrote:
> On 02/15/2013 11:19 AM, Jan Beulich wrote:
>> find_iommu_for_device() can easily return NULL instead, as all of its
>> callers are prepared for that.
> 
> This patch is obsoleted by the second patch ("[PATCH 2/4] AMD IOMMU: 
> cover all functions of a device even if ACPI only tells us of func 0"), 
> isn't it?

Yes it is, but it is an (I think) obviously correct thing to do, and
hence much more of a backporting candidate than the other one.

Jan