Introduce automatic DMA configuration for IOMMU masters
Get series with b4
b4 am 2496335.D95hVHbola@wuerfelVersions newest first · linked by author and title
- v5 Latest0 of 8 patches 0 repliesNew
- v4 RFC posting 2/20 of 8 patches 0 repliesSuperseded
- v4 RFC posting 1/20 of 8 patches 0 repliesSuperseded
Earlier versions · 2
| Version | Posted | Patches | Replies | Status |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| v2 RFC | 4 of 7 patches | 0 replies | Superseded | |
| v1 RFC | 3 of 7 patches | 0 replies | Superseded |
Patches in v5 No applies recorded yet
None of the 8 patches the cover letter announces are in this archive.
Reviews trailers per patch
| Patch | Arnd Bergmann |
|---|---|
| Series | A-b |
Trailers given in replies are filled; those carried in the patches from earlier versions are outlined with dashes.
Cover letter [PATCH v5 0/8] Introduce automatic DMA configuration for IOMMU masters
Quoted 18 lines · On Friday 28 November 2014 13:29:38 Will Deacon wrote:
Hi all,
Here is v5 of the patches I've previously sent here:
RFCv1: http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-arm-kernel/2014-August/283023.html
RFCv2: http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-arm-kernel/2014-September/283752.html
RFCv3: http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-arm-kernel/2014-September/287031.html
RFCv4: http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-arm-kernel/2014-November/302711.htmlChanges since RFCv4 include:
- Dropped the RFC tag, since has been used by a couple of people now
- Dropped the DMA segment configuration from
of_dma_configure, as there appear to be assumptions about 64k segments elsewhere in the kernel- Added acks/tested-bys (thanks to everybody who reviewed the series)
Quoted 7 lines
- A few small fixes for issues found by Marek
Arnd: Is this too late for 3.19? We could merge the first 6 patches with no issues, since there aren't any callers of
of_iommu_initwithout patch 7 anyway.Up to you.
I think this looks great overall. My only feedback is the exact same comment that Joerg already made:
Quoted 9 lines · On Friday 28 November 2014 14:03:36 jroedel at suse.de wrote:
Hmm, I don't like the idea of storing private data in
iommu_ops. But given that this is already an improvement we can build on later, here is myAcked-by Joerg Roedel <[email protected]>To further improve this we should probably introduce a seperate iommu-descriptor data-structure later which then describes a single hardware iommu device.
so I second that and add my
Now, who should merge this series? I think someone should put all eight patches into linux-next now, and if something goes wrong with the last two, then we skip them for 3.19.
Arnd