RFC IOMMU probe deferral support
Get series with b4
b4 am '[email protected]'Versions newest first
- v1 RFC Latest0 of 9 patches 0 repliesNew
Patches in v1 No applies recorded yet
None of the 9 patches the cover letter announces are in this archive.
Reviews trailers per patch
No Reviewed-by, Acked-by or Tested-by trailers for v1 yet.
Cover letter [RFC 0/9] IOMMU probe deferral support
Hi Robin/Laurent,
Quoted 25 lines
Quoted 25 lines
-----Original Message-----
From: linux-arm-kernel [mailto:linux-arm-kernel-
bounces at lists.infradead.org] On Behalf Of Marek Szyprowski
Sent: Thursday, May 12, 2016 6:23 PM
To: Sricharan R <[email protected]>; will.deacon at arm.com; robin.murphy at arm.com; joro at 8bytes.org; iommu at lists.linux- foundation.org; linux-arm-kernel at lists.infradead.org; laurent.pinchart at ideasonboard.com
Subject: Re: [RFC 0/9] IOMMU probe deferral supportHello,
Quoted 5 lines · Sricharan R
This is mostly a repost of the probe deferral series from Laurent Pinchart [1]. Added a check to fix boot with ACPI.
Adapted arm-smmu driver to work with deferred probing and added a new api for the below reason. This is based on the generic iommu binding series from Robin Murphy <[email protected]>.Thanks for this patchset. I'm working on some serious rework in exynos power domains and clocks support code and it turned out that I need this feature to resolve probing order. It works fine on my internal tree, where some iommu controllers cannot get their clocks early enough.
Quoted 5 lines
Quoted 2 lines
Tested-by Marek Szyprowski <[email protected]>Thanks for testing. So the issue that I was facing also was the same where the iommu controllers cannot get clocks early. So waiting for some suggestions if this is right/ or there is another way for doing this probe deferral?
So wanted to ask what will be approach to have the probe deferral working. I remember that you mentioned last time that you were going to visit this. Hence thought of asking how to proceed on this ?
Regards,
Sricharan