On Mon, Jan 25, 2010 at 12:54:04PM -0800, 0bo0 wrote:
> hi,
>
>
> On Mon, Jan 25, 2010 at 12:38 PM, Pasi Kärkkäinen <pasik@xxxxxx> wrote:
> > Xen PCI passthrough to PV guests has been supported for years, and it
> > doesn't require IOMMU or VT-d. On both Intel and AMD.
> >
> > Xen PCI passthrough to PV guests was actually available years before
> > there even was a VT-d spec!
>
> good. esp since I've been doing it for ages ... ;-)
>
> so all that said (thx) ...
>
> why is it, that when I'm trying to "get around" the pci-passthrough
> co-assignment requirement -- and both fixes for 34x (as an
> unimplemented patch) and 4x (option in config file) are
> referenced/available -- AND,i'm (i) on AMD, and (ii) only using
> passthrough to PV guests, that I'm being referred to Intel VT-d
> documentation for the rationale/explanation that I'm *not* seeing a
> bug?
>
> not trying to be difficult here, just seems like the finger's being
> pointed at something that's not relevant to my situtation ....
>
Well maybe you should point it out to be a regression compared to previous
functionality..
ie. when you don't use VT-d.
-- Pasi
_______________________________________________
Xen-users mailing list
Xen-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-users
|
Home