All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
diff for duplicates of <1427149549.4770.240.camel@kernel.crashing.org>

diff --git a/a/1.txt b/N1/1.txt
index 45f321a..5223642 100644
--- a/a/1.txt
+++ b/N1/1.txt
@@ -10,7 +10,7 @@ On Mon, 2015-03-23 at 12:54 -0400, Sowmini Varadhan wrote:
 > - Caller of iommu_tbl_range_alloc() can do the flush_all if they 
 >   see start <= end for the one single pool 
 > - lose the other ->flush_all invocation (i.e., the one that is
->   done when iommu_area_alloc() fails for pass == 0, and we reset
+>   done when iommu_area_alloc() fails for pass = 0, and we reset
 >   start to 0 to roll-back)
 > 
 > that would avoid the need for any iommu_tbl_ops in my patch-set.
@@ -21,7 +21,7 @@ kaboom. However if that's the only callback left, pass it as an
 argument.
 
 > But it would imply that you would still take the perf hit for the roll-back
-> if we failed the pass == 0 iteration through iommu_area_alloc().
+> if we failed the pass = 0 iteration through iommu_area_alloc().
 > Perhaps this is an acceptable compromise in favor of cleaner code
 > (again, assuming that current/future archs will all follow the HV
 > based design).
diff --git a/a/content_digest b/N1/content_digest
index 744a172..3247bb9 100644
--- a/a/content_digest
+++ b/N1/content_digest
@@ -5,7 +5,7 @@
  "ref\020150323165406.GG14061@oracle.com\0"
  "From\0Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org>\0"
  "Subject\0Re: Generic IOMMU pooled allocator\0"
- "Date\0Tue, 24 Mar 2015 09:25:49 +1100\0"
+ "Date\0Mon, 23 Mar 2015 22:25:49 +0000\0"
  "To\0Sowmini Varadhan <sowmini.varadhan@oracle.com>\0"
  "Cc\0aik@au1.ibm.com"
   aik@ozlabs.ru
@@ -28,7 +28,7 @@
  "> - Caller of iommu_tbl_range_alloc() can do the flush_all if they \n"
  ">   see start <= end for the one single pool \n"
  "> - lose the other ->flush_all invocation (i.e., the one that is\n"
- ">   done when iommu_area_alloc() fails for pass == 0, and we reset\n"
+ ">   done when iommu_area_alloc() fails for pass = 0, and we reset\n"
  ">   start to 0 to roll-back)\n"
  "> \n"
  "> that would avoid the need for any iommu_tbl_ops in my patch-set.\n"
@@ -39,7 +39,7 @@
  "argument.\n"
  "\n"
  "> But it would imply that you would still take the perf hit for the roll-back\n"
- "> if we failed the pass == 0 iteration through iommu_area_alloc().\n"
+ "> if we failed the pass = 0 iteration through iommu_area_alloc().\n"
  "> Perhaps this is an acceptable compromise in favor of cleaner code\n"
  "> (again, assuming that current/future archs will all follow the HV\n"
  "> based design).\n"
@@ -47,4 +47,4 @@
  "> --Sowmini\n"
  >
 
-53e77cc4d70a3ed8f5c5b07e31928824b1c02697bdb843b1ed536e00a4d8730e
+d57a6644c6a8f71ec330ef88b36d8830a7ac3cac996441b08c8afdd722fedf6b

This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.