From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Will Deacon Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/4] ARM SMMU per-context TLB sync Date: Thu, 30 Mar 2017 15:43:10 +0100 Message-ID: <20170330144310.GI22160@arm.com> References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: iommu-bounces-cunTk1MwBs9QetFLy7KEm3xJsTq8ys+cHZ5vskTnxNA@public.gmane.org Errors-To: iommu-bounces-cunTk1MwBs9QetFLy7KEm3xJsTq8ys+cHZ5vskTnxNA@public.gmane.org To: Robin Murphy Cc: iommu-cunTk1MwBs9QetFLy7KEm3xJsTq8ys+cHZ5vskTnxNA@public.gmane.org, linux-arm-kernel-IAPFreCvJWM7uuMidbF8XUB+6BGkLq7r@public.gmane.org List-Id: iommu@lists.linux-foundation.org On Tue, Mar 07, 2017 at 06:09:03PM +0000, Robin Murphy wrote: > The discussion around context-level access for Qualcomm SMMUs reminded > me to dig up this patch I started ages ago and finish it off. As it's > ended up, it's now a mini-series, with some new preparatory cleanup > manifesting as patches 2 and 3. Patch 1 is broken out of patch 3 for > clarity as somewhat of a fix in its own right, in that it's really an > entirely unrelated thing which came up in parallel, but happens to > be inherent to code I'm touching here anyway. Apart from the first patch, most of this is looking good. Please can you respin the series without the first patch and with my comments addressed? Cheers, Will From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: will.deacon@arm.com (Will Deacon) Date: Thu, 30 Mar 2017 15:43:10 +0100 Subject: [PATCH 0/4] ARM SMMU per-context TLB sync In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20170330144310.GI22160@arm.com> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On Tue, Mar 07, 2017 at 06:09:03PM +0000, Robin Murphy wrote: > The discussion around context-level access for Qualcomm SMMUs reminded > me to dig up this patch I started ages ago and finish it off. As it's > ended up, it's now a mini-series, with some new preparatory cleanup > manifesting as patches 2 and 3. Patch 1 is broken out of patch 3 for > clarity as somewhat of a fix in its own right, in that it's really an > entirely unrelated thing which came up in parallel, but happens to > be inherent to code I'm touching here anyway. Apart from the first patch, most of this is looking good. Please can you respin the series without the first patch and with my comments addressed? Cheers, Will