From: will.deacon@arm.com (Will Deacon)
Date: Mon, 11 Aug 2014 10:30:24 +0100
Subject: [PATCHv6 0/5] DMA Atomic pool for arm64
In-Reply-To: <1407529848-6806-1-git-send-email-lauraa@codeaurora.org>
References: <1407529848-6806-1-git-send-email-lauraa@codeaurora.org>
Message-ID: <20140811093024.GF15344@arm.com>
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org

On Fri, Aug 08, 2014 at 09:30:48PM +0100, Laura Abbott wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> This is v6 of the series to add an atomic pool for arm64 and refactor some of
> the arm dma_atomic code as well.
> 
> Russell, assuming you have no issues I'd like to get your Acked-by before
> Catalin picks this up. As always, testing and reviews are appreiciated.
> 
> Thanks,
> Laura
> 
> 
> v6: Tweaked the commit text to clarify that arm is moving from
> ioremap_page_range to map_vm_area and friends
> 
> v5: v4: Addressed comments from Thierry and Catalin. Updated map_vm_area call in
> dma_common_pages_remap since the API changed.
> 
> v4: Simplified the logic in gen_pool_first_fit_order_align which makes the
> data argument actually unused.
> 
> v3: Now a patch series due to refactoring of arm code. arm and arm64 now both
> use genalloc for atomic pool management. genalloc extensions added.
> DMA remapping code factored out as well.
> 
> v2: Various bug fixes pointed out by David and Ritesh (CMA dependency, swapping
> coherent, noncoherent). I'm still not sure how to address the devicetree
> suggestion by Will [1][2]. I added the devicetree mailing list this time around
> to get more input on this.
> 
> [1] http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-arm-kernel/2014-April/249180.html
> [2] http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-arm-kernel/2014-April/249528.html

FWIW: I don't think the device-tree comments need to block this series. I
was just curious as to why they weren't being used.

Will