From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
To: Boris Ostrovsky <boris.ostrovsky@oracle.com>
Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>,
iommu@lists.linux-foundation.org, x86@kernel.org,
Anshuman Khandual <anshuman.khandual@arm.com>,
Tom Lendacky <thomas.lendacky@amd.com>,
Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@oracle.com>,
Stefano Stabellini <sstabellini@kernel.org>,
Juergen Gross <jgross@suse.com>, Joerg Roedel <joro@8bytes.org>,
David Woodhouse <dwmw2@infradead.org>,
Lu Baolu <baolu.lu@linux.intel.com>,
Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@arm.com>,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org, linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org,
linux-mips@vger.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org,
linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org, linux-s390@vger.kernel.org,
linux-hyperv@vger.kernel.org, tboot-devel@lists.sourceforge.net,
linux-pci@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 11/12] swiotlb: merge swiotlb-xen initialization into swiotlb
Date: Wed, 9 Mar 2022 07:18:40 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20220309061840.GA31435@lst.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <6a22ea1e-4823-5c3b-97ee-a29155404a0d@oracle.com>
On Tue, Mar 08, 2022 at 04:38:21PM -0500, Boris Ostrovsky wrote:
>
> On 3/1/22 5:53 AM, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
>> Allow to pass a remap argument to the swiotlb initialization functions
>> to handle the Xen/x86 remap case. ARM/ARM64 never did any remapping
>> from xen_swiotlb_fixup, so we don't even need that quirk.
>
>
> Any chance this patch could be split? Lots of things are happening here and it's somewhat hard to review. (Patch 7 too BTW but I think I managed to get through it)
What would be your preferred split?
>> diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/pci-dma.c b/arch/x86/kernel/pci-dma.c
>> index e0def4b1c3181..2f2c468acb955 100644
>> --- a/arch/x86/kernel/pci-dma.c
>> +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/pci-dma.c
>> @@ -71,15 +71,12 @@ static inline void __init pci_swiotlb_detect(void)
>> #endif /* CONFIG_SWIOTLB */
>> #ifdef CONFIG_SWIOTLB_XEN
>> -static bool xen_swiotlb;
>> -
>> static void __init pci_xen_swiotlb_init(void)
>> {
>> if (!xen_initial_domain() && !x86_swiotlb_enable)
>> return;
>
>
> Now that there is a single call site for this routine I think this check can be dropped. We are only called here for xen_initial_domain()==true.
The callsite just checks xen_pv_domain() and itself is called
unconditionally during initialization.
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
To: Boris Ostrovsky <boris.ostrovsky@oracle.com>
Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>,
iommu@lists.linux-foundation.org, x86@kernel.org,
Anshuman Khandual <anshuman.khandual@arm.com>,
Tom Lendacky <thomas.lendacky@amd.com>,
Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@oracle.com>,
Stefano Stabellini <sstabellini@kernel.org>,
Juergen Gross <jgross@suse.com>, Joerg Roedel <joro@8bytes.org>,
David Woodhouse <dwmw2@infradead.org>,
Lu Baolu <baolu.lu@linux.intel.com>,
Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@arm.com>,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org, linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org,
linux-mips@vger.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org,
linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org, linux-s390@vger.kernel.org,
linux-hyperv@vger.kernel.org, tboot-devel@lists.sourceforge.net,
linux-pci@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 11/12] swiotlb: merge swiotlb-xen initialization into swiotlb
Date: Wed, 09 Mar 2022 06:18:40 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20220309061840.GA31435@lst.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <6a22ea1e-4823-5c3b-97ee-a29155404a0d@oracle.com>
On Tue, Mar 08, 2022 at 04:38:21PM -0500, Boris Ostrovsky wrote:
>
> On 3/1/22 5:53 AM, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
>> Allow to pass a remap argument to the swiotlb initialization functions
>> to handle the Xen/x86 remap case. ARM/ARM64 never did any remapping
>> from xen_swiotlb_fixup, so we don't even need that quirk.
>
>
> Any chance this patch could be split? Lots of things are happening here and it's somewhat hard to review. (Patch 7 too BTW but I think I managed to get through it)
What would be your preferred split?
>> diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/pci-dma.c b/arch/x86/kernel/pci-dma.c
>> index e0def4b1c3181..2f2c468acb955 100644
>> --- a/arch/x86/kernel/pci-dma.c
>> +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/pci-dma.c
>> @@ -71,15 +71,12 @@ static inline void __init pci_swiotlb_detect(void)
>> #endif /* CONFIG_SWIOTLB */
>> #ifdef CONFIG_SWIOTLB_XEN
>> -static bool xen_swiotlb;
>> -
>> static void __init pci_xen_swiotlb_init(void)
>> {
>> if (!xen_initial_domain() && !x86_swiotlb_enable)
>> return;
>
>
> Now that there is a single call site for this routine I think this check can be dropped. We are only called here for xen_initial_domain()=true.
The callsite just checks xen_pv_domain() and itself is called
unconditionally during initialization.
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
To: Boris Ostrovsky <boris.ostrovsky@oracle.com>
Cc: linux-hyperv@vger.kernel.org, x86@kernel.org,
linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org, linux-pci@vger.kernel.org,
linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org, Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>,
linux-s390@vger.kernel.org,
Stefano Stabellini <sstabellini@kernel.org>,
Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@oracle.com>,
tboot-devel@lists.sourceforge.net,
xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org,
David Woodhouse <dwmw2@infradead.org>,
Tom Lendacky <thomas.lendacky@amd.com>,
Anshuman Khandual <anshuman.khandual@arm.com>,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
Juergen Gross <jgross@suse.com>,
linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, linux-mips@vger.kernel.org,
iommu@lists.linux-foundation.org,
Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@arm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 11/12] swiotlb: merge swiotlb-xen initialization into swiotlb
Date: Wed, 9 Mar 2022 07:18:40 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20220309061840.GA31435@lst.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <6a22ea1e-4823-5c3b-97ee-a29155404a0d@oracle.com>
On Tue, Mar 08, 2022 at 04:38:21PM -0500, Boris Ostrovsky wrote:
>
> On 3/1/22 5:53 AM, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
>> Allow to pass a remap argument to the swiotlb initialization functions
>> to handle the Xen/x86 remap case. ARM/ARM64 never did any remapping
>> from xen_swiotlb_fixup, so we don't even need that quirk.
>
>
> Any chance this patch could be split? Lots of things are happening here and it's somewhat hard to review. (Patch 7 too BTW but I think I managed to get through it)
What would be your preferred split?
>> diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/pci-dma.c b/arch/x86/kernel/pci-dma.c
>> index e0def4b1c3181..2f2c468acb955 100644
>> --- a/arch/x86/kernel/pci-dma.c
>> +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/pci-dma.c
>> @@ -71,15 +71,12 @@ static inline void __init pci_swiotlb_detect(void)
>> #endif /* CONFIG_SWIOTLB */
>> #ifdef CONFIG_SWIOTLB_XEN
>> -static bool xen_swiotlb;
>> -
>> static void __init pci_xen_swiotlb_init(void)
>> {
>> if (!xen_initial_domain() && !x86_swiotlb_enable)
>> return;
>
>
> Now that there is a single call site for this routine I think this check can be dropped. We are only called here for xen_initial_domain()==true.
The callsite just checks xen_pv_domain() and itself is called
unconditionally during initialization.
_______________________________________________
iommu mailing list
iommu@lists.linux-foundation.org
https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/iommu
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
To: Boris Ostrovsky <boris.ostrovsky@oracle.com>
Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>,
iommu@lists.linux-foundation.org, x86@kernel.org,
Anshuman Khandual <anshuman.khandual@arm.com>,
Tom Lendacky <thomas.lendacky@amd.com>,
Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@oracle.com>,
Stefano Stabellini <sstabellini@kernel.org>,
Juergen Gross <jgross@suse.com>, Joerg Roedel <joro@8bytes.org>,
David Woodhouse <dwmw2@infradead.org>,
Lu Baolu <baolu.lu@linux.intel.com>,
Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@arm.com>,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org, linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org,
linux-mips@vger.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org,
linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org, linux-s390@vger.kernel.org,
linux-hyperv@vger.kernel.org, tboot-devel@lists.sourceforge.net,
linux-pci@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 11/12] swiotlb: merge swiotlb-xen initialization into swiotlb
Date: Wed, 9 Mar 2022 07:18:40 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20220309061840.GA31435@lst.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <6a22ea1e-4823-5c3b-97ee-a29155404a0d@oracle.com>
On Tue, Mar 08, 2022 at 04:38:21PM -0500, Boris Ostrovsky wrote:
>
> On 3/1/22 5:53 AM, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
>> Allow to pass a remap argument to the swiotlb initialization functions
>> to handle the Xen/x86 remap case. ARM/ARM64 never did any remapping
>> from xen_swiotlb_fixup, so we don't even need that quirk.
>
>
> Any chance this patch could be split? Lots of things are happening here and it's somewhat hard to review. (Patch 7 too BTW but I think I managed to get through it)
What would be your preferred split?
>> diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/pci-dma.c b/arch/x86/kernel/pci-dma.c
>> index e0def4b1c3181..2f2c468acb955 100644
>> --- a/arch/x86/kernel/pci-dma.c
>> +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/pci-dma.c
>> @@ -71,15 +71,12 @@ static inline void __init pci_swiotlb_detect(void)
>> #endif /* CONFIG_SWIOTLB */
>> #ifdef CONFIG_SWIOTLB_XEN
>> -static bool xen_swiotlb;
>> -
>> static void __init pci_xen_swiotlb_init(void)
>> {
>> if (!xen_initial_domain() && !x86_swiotlb_enable)
>> return;
>
>
> Now that there is a single call site for this routine I think this check can be dropped. We are only called here for xen_initial_domain()==true.
The callsite just checks xen_pv_domain() and itself is called
unconditionally during initialization.
_______________________________________________
linux-riscv mailing list
linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-riscv
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
To: Boris Ostrovsky <boris.ostrovsky@oracle.com>
Cc: linux-hyperv@vger.kernel.org, x86@kernel.org,
linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org, linux-pci@vger.kernel.org,
linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org, Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>,
linux-s390@vger.kernel.org,
Stefano Stabellini <sstabellini@kernel.org>,
Joerg Roedel <joro@8bytes.org>,
Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@oracle.com>,
tboot-devel@lists.sourceforge.net,
xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org,
David Woodhouse <dwmw2@infradead.org>,
Tom Lendacky <thomas.lendacky@amd.com>,
Anshuman Khandual <anshuman.khandual@arm.com>,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
Juergen Gross <jgross@suse.com>,
linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, linux-mips@vger.kernel.org,
iommu@lists.linux-foundation.org,
Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@arm.com>,
Lu Baolu <baolu.lu@linux.intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 11/12] swiotlb: merge swiotlb-xen initialization into swiotlb
Date: Wed, 9 Mar 2022 07:18:40 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20220309061840.GA31435@lst.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <6a22ea1e-4823-5c3b-97ee-a29155404a0d@oracle.com>
On Tue, Mar 08, 2022 at 04:38:21PM -0500, Boris Ostrovsky wrote:
>
> On 3/1/22 5:53 AM, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
>> Allow to pass a remap argument to the swiotlb initialization functions
>> to handle the Xen/x86 remap case. ARM/ARM64 never did any remapping
>> from xen_swiotlb_fixup, so we don't even need that quirk.
>
>
> Any chance this patch could be split? Lots of things are happening here and it's somewhat hard to review. (Patch 7 too BTW but I think I managed to get through it)
What would be your preferred split?
>> diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/pci-dma.c b/arch/x86/kernel/pci-dma.c
>> index e0def4b1c3181..2f2c468acb955 100644
>> --- a/arch/x86/kernel/pci-dma.c
>> +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/pci-dma.c
>> @@ -71,15 +71,12 @@ static inline void __init pci_swiotlb_detect(void)
>> #endif /* CONFIG_SWIOTLB */
>> #ifdef CONFIG_SWIOTLB_XEN
>> -static bool xen_swiotlb;
>> -
>> static void __init pci_xen_swiotlb_init(void)
>> {
>> if (!xen_initial_domain() && !x86_swiotlb_enable)
>> return;
>
>
> Now that there is a single call site for this routine I think this check can be dropped. We are only called here for xen_initial_domain()==true.
The callsite just checks xen_pv_domain() and itself is called
unconditionally during initialization.
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
To: Boris Ostrovsky <boris.ostrovsky@oracle.com>
Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>,
iommu@lists.linux-foundation.org, x86@kernel.org,
Anshuman Khandual <anshuman.khandual@arm.com>,
Tom Lendacky <thomas.lendacky@amd.com>,
Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@oracle.com>,
Stefano Stabellini <sstabellini@kernel.org>,
Juergen Gross <jgross@suse.com>, Joerg Roedel <joro@8bytes.org>,
David Woodhouse <dwmw2@infradead.org>,
Lu Baolu <baolu.lu@linux.intel.com>,
Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@arm.com>,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org, linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org,
linux-mips@vger.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org,
linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org, linux-s390@vger.kernel.org,
linux-hyperv@vger.kernel.org, tboot-devel@lists.sourceforge.net,
linux-pci@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 11/12] swiotlb: merge swiotlb-xen initialization into swiotlb
Date: Wed, 9 Mar 2022 07:18:40 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20220309061840.GA31435@lst.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <6a22ea1e-4823-5c3b-97ee-a29155404a0d@oracle.com>
On Tue, Mar 08, 2022 at 04:38:21PM -0500, Boris Ostrovsky wrote:
>
> On 3/1/22 5:53 AM, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
>> Allow to pass a remap argument to the swiotlb initialization functions
>> to handle the Xen/x86 remap case. ARM/ARM64 never did any remapping
>> from xen_swiotlb_fixup, so we don't even need that quirk.
>
>
> Any chance this patch could be split? Lots of things are happening here and it's somewhat hard to review. (Patch 7 too BTW but I think I managed to get through it)
What would be your preferred split?
>> diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/pci-dma.c b/arch/x86/kernel/pci-dma.c
>> index e0def4b1c3181..2f2c468acb955 100644
>> --- a/arch/x86/kernel/pci-dma.c
>> +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/pci-dma.c
>> @@ -71,15 +71,12 @@ static inline void __init pci_swiotlb_detect(void)
>> #endif /* CONFIG_SWIOTLB */
>> #ifdef CONFIG_SWIOTLB_XEN
>> -static bool xen_swiotlb;
>> -
>> static void __init pci_xen_swiotlb_init(void)
>> {
>> if (!xen_initial_domain() && !x86_swiotlb_enable)
>> return;
>
>
> Now that there is a single call site for this routine I think this check can be dropped. We are only called here for xen_initial_domain()==true.
The callsite just checks xen_pv_domain() and itself is called
unconditionally during initialization.
_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-03-09 6:18 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 228+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-03-01 10:52 cleanup swiotlb initialization v4 Christoph Hellwig
2022-03-01 10:52 ` Christoph Hellwig
2022-03-01 10:52 ` Christoph Hellwig
2022-03-01 10:52 ` Christoph Hellwig
2022-03-01 10:52 ` Christoph Hellwig
2022-03-01 10:52 ` Christoph Hellwig
2022-03-01 10:53 ` [PATCH 01/12] dma-direct: use is_swiotlb_active in dma_direct_map_page Christoph Hellwig
2022-03-01 10:53 ` Christoph Hellwig
2022-03-01 10:53 ` Christoph Hellwig
2022-03-01 10:53 ` Christoph Hellwig
2022-03-01 10:53 ` Christoph Hellwig
2022-03-01 10:53 ` Christoph Hellwig
2022-03-01 10:53 ` [PATCH 02/12] swiotlb: make swiotlb_exit a no-op if SWIOTLB_FORCE is set Christoph Hellwig
2022-03-01 10:53 ` Christoph Hellwig
2022-03-01 10:53 ` Christoph Hellwig
2022-03-01 10:53 ` Christoph Hellwig
2022-03-01 10:53 ` Christoph Hellwig
2022-03-01 10:53 ` Christoph Hellwig
2022-03-01 10:53 ` [PATCH 03/12] swiotlb: simplify swiotlb_max_segment Christoph Hellwig
2022-03-01 10:53 ` Christoph Hellwig
2022-03-01 10:53 ` Christoph Hellwig
2022-03-01 10:53 ` Christoph Hellwig
2022-03-01 10:53 ` Christoph Hellwig
2022-03-01 10:53 ` Christoph Hellwig
2022-03-01 10:53 ` [PATCH 04/12] swiotlb: rename swiotlb_late_init_with_default_size Christoph Hellwig
2022-03-01 10:53 ` Christoph Hellwig
2022-03-01 10:53 ` Christoph Hellwig
2022-03-01 10:53 ` Christoph Hellwig
2022-03-01 10:53 ` Christoph Hellwig
2022-03-01 10:53 ` Christoph Hellwig
2022-03-01 10:53 ` [PATCH 05/12] swiotlb: pass a gfp_mask argument to swiotlb_init_late Christoph Hellwig
2022-03-01 10:53 ` Christoph Hellwig
2022-03-01 10:53 ` Christoph Hellwig
2022-03-01 10:53 ` Christoph Hellwig
2022-03-01 10:53 ` Christoph Hellwig
2022-03-01 10:53 ` Christoph Hellwig
2022-03-01 10:53 ` [PATCH 06/12] MIPS/octeon: use swiotlb_init instead of open coding it Christoph Hellwig
2022-03-01 10:53 ` Christoph Hellwig
2022-03-01 10:53 ` Christoph Hellwig
2022-03-01 10:53 ` Christoph Hellwig
2022-03-01 10:53 ` Christoph Hellwig
2022-03-01 10:53 ` Christoph Hellwig
2022-03-03 16:39 ` Thomas Bogendoerfer
2022-03-03 16:39 ` Thomas Bogendoerfer
2022-03-03 16:39 ` Thomas Bogendoerfer
2022-03-03 16:39 ` Thomas Bogendoerfer
2022-03-03 16:39 ` Thomas Bogendoerfer
2022-03-03 16:39 ` Thomas Bogendoerfer
2022-03-01 10:53 ` [PATCH 07/12] x86: remove the IOMMU table infrastructure Christoph Hellwig
2022-03-01 10:53 ` Christoph Hellwig
2022-03-01 10:53 ` Christoph Hellwig
2022-03-01 10:53 ` Christoph Hellwig
2022-03-01 10:53 ` Christoph Hellwig
2022-03-01 10:53 ` Christoph Hellwig
2022-03-01 10:53 ` [PATCH 08/12] x86: centralize setting SWIOTLB_FORCE when guest memory encryption is enabled Christoph Hellwig
2022-03-01 10:53 ` Christoph Hellwig
2022-03-01 10:53 ` Christoph Hellwig
2022-03-01 10:53 ` Christoph Hellwig
2022-03-01 10:53 ` Christoph Hellwig
2022-03-01 10:53 ` Christoph Hellwig
2022-03-01 11:39 ` Andrew Cooper
2022-03-01 11:39 ` Andrew Cooper
2022-03-01 11:39 ` Andrew Cooper
2022-03-01 11:39 ` Andrew Cooper
2022-03-01 11:39 ` Andrew Cooper via iommu
2022-03-01 11:39 ` Andrew Cooper
2022-03-01 11:43 ` Christoph Hellwig
2022-03-01 11:43 ` Christoph Hellwig
2022-03-01 11:43 ` Christoph Hellwig
2022-03-01 11:43 ` Christoph Hellwig
2022-03-01 11:43 ` Christoph Hellwig
2022-03-01 11:43 ` Christoph Hellwig
2022-03-01 10:53 ` [PATCH 09/12] swiotlb: make the swiotlb_init interface more useful Christoph Hellwig
2022-03-01 10:53 ` Christoph Hellwig
2022-03-01 10:53 ` Christoph Hellwig
2022-03-01 10:53 ` Christoph Hellwig
2022-03-01 10:53 ` Christoph Hellwig
2022-03-01 10:53 ` Christoph Hellwig
2022-03-01 10:53 ` [PATCH 10/12] swiotlb: add a SWIOTLB_ANY flag to lift the low memory restriction Christoph Hellwig
2022-03-01 10:53 ` Christoph Hellwig
2022-03-01 10:53 ` Christoph Hellwig
2022-03-01 10:53 ` Christoph Hellwig
2022-03-01 10:53 ` Christoph Hellwig
2022-03-01 10:53 ` Christoph Hellwig
2022-03-04 18:12 ` Michael Kelley (LINUX)
2022-03-04 18:12 ` Michael Kelley (LINUX)
2022-03-04 18:12 ` Michael Kelley (LINUX)
2022-03-04 18:12 ` Michael Kelley (LINUX)
2022-03-04 18:12 ` Michael Kelley (LINUX) via iommu
2022-03-04 18:12 ` Michael Kelley (LINUX)
2022-03-04 18:27 ` Dongli Zhang
2022-03-04 18:27 ` Dongli Zhang
2022-03-04 18:27 ` Dongli Zhang
2022-03-04 18:27 ` Dongli Zhang
2022-03-04 18:27 ` Dongli Zhang
2022-03-04 18:27 ` Dongli Zhang
2022-03-06 17:01 ` Michael Kelley (LINUX)
2022-03-06 17:01 ` Michael Kelley (LINUX)
2022-03-06 17:01 ` Michael Kelley (LINUX)
2022-03-06 17:01 ` Michael Kelley (LINUX)
2022-03-06 17:01 ` Michael Kelley (LINUX) via iommu
2022-03-06 17:01 ` Michael Kelley (LINUX)
2022-03-01 10:53 ` [PATCH 11/12] swiotlb: merge swiotlb-xen initialization into swiotlb Christoph Hellwig
2022-03-01 10:53 ` Christoph Hellwig
2022-03-01 10:53 ` Christoph Hellwig
2022-03-01 10:53 ` Christoph Hellwig
2022-03-01 10:53 ` Christoph Hellwig
2022-03-01 10:53 ` Christoph Hellwig
2022-03-02 2:55 ` Stefano Stabellini
2022-03-02 2:55 ` Stefano Stabellini
2022-03-02 2:55 ` Stefano Stabellini
2022-03-02 2:55 ` Stefano Stabellini
2022-03-02 2:55 ` Stefano Stabellini
2022-03-02 2:55 ` Stefano Stabellini
2022-03-02 8:15 ` Christoph Hellwig
2022-03-02 8:15 ` Christoph Hellwig
2022-03-02 8:15 ` Christoph Hellwig
2022-03-02 8:15 ` Christoph Hellwig
2022-03-02 8:15 ` Christoph Hellwig
2022-03-02 8:15 ` Christoph Hellwig
2022-03-03 1:25 ` Stefano Stabellini
2022-03-03 1:25 ` Stefano Stabellini
2022-03-03 1:25 ` Stefano Stabellini
2022-03-03 1:25 ` Stefano Stabellini
2022-03-03 1:25 ` Stefano Stabellini
2022-03-03 1:25 ` Stefano Stabellini
2022-03-03 10:59 ` Christoph Hellwig
2022-03-03 10:59 ` Christoph Hellwig
2022-03-03 10:59 ` Christoph Hellwig
2022-03-03 10:59 ` Christoph Hellwig
2022-03-03 10:59 ` Christoph Hellwig
2022-03-03 10:59 ` Christoph Hellwig
2022-03-03 22:49 ` Stefano Stabellini
2022-03-03 22:49 ` Stefano Stabellini
2022-03-03 22:49 ` Stefano Stabellini
2022-03-03 22:49 ` Stefano Stabellini
2022-03-03 22:49 ` Stefano Stabellini
2022-03-03 22:49 ` Stefano Stabellini
2022-03-04 16:34 ` Christoph Hellwig
2022-03-04 16:34 ` Christoph Hellwig
2022-03-04 16:34 ` Christoph Hellwig
2022-03-04 16:34 ` Christoph Hellwig
2022-03-04 16:34 ` Christoph Hellwig
2022-03-04 16:34 ` Christoph Hellwig
2022-03-04 23:22 ` Stefano Stabellini
2022-03-04 23:22 ` Stefano Stabellini
2022-03-04 23:22 ` Stefano Stabellini
2022-03-04 23:22 ` Stefano Stabellini
2022-03-04 23:22 ` Stefano Stabellini
2022-03-04 23:22 ` Stefano Stabellini
2022-03-02 13:15 ` Boris Ostrovsky
2022-03-02 13:15 ` Boris Ostrovsky
2022-03-02 13:15 ` Boris Ostrovsky
2022-03-02 13:15 ` Boris Ostrovsky
2022-03-02 13:15 ` Boris Ostrovsky
2022-03-02 13:15 ` Boris Ostrovsky
2022-03-02 13:17 ` Boris Ostrovsky
2022-03-02 13:17 ` Boris Ostrovsky
2022-03-02 13:17 ` Boris Ostrovsky
2022-03-02 13:17 ` Boris Ostrovsky
2022-03-02 13:17 ` Boris Ostrovsky
2022-03-02 13:17 ` Boris Ostrovsky
2022-03-03 10:57 ` Christoph Hellwig
2022-03-03 10:57 ` Christoph Hellwig
2022-03-03 10:57 ` Christoph Hellwig
2022-03-03 10:57 ` Christoph Hellwig
2022-03-03 10:57 ` Christoph Hellwig
2022-03-03 10:57 ` Christoph Hellwig
2022-03-03 19:06 ` Boris Ostrovsky
2022-03-03 19:06 ` Boris Ostrovsky
2022-03-03 19:06 ` Boris Ostrovsky
2022-03-03 19:06 ` Boris Ostrovsky
2022-03-03 19:06 ` Boris Ostrovsky
2022-03-03 19:06 ` Boris Ostrovsky
2022-03-04 17:28 ` Christoph Hellwig
2022-03-04 17:28 ` Christoph Hellwig
2022-03-04 17:28 ` Christoph Hellwig
2022-03-04 17:28 ` Christoph Hellwig
2022-03-04 17:28 ` Christoph Hellwig
2022-03-04 17:28 ` Christoph Hellwig
2022-03-04 17:36 ` Boris Ostrovsky
2022-03-04 17:36 ` Boris Ostrovsky
2022-03-04 17:36 ` Boris Ostrovsky
2022-03-04 17:36 ` Boris Ostrovsky
2022-03-04 17:36 ` Boris Ostrovsky
2022-03-04 17:36 ` Boris Ostrovsky
2022-03-04 17:43 ` Christoph Hellwig
2022-03-04 17:43 ` Christoph Hellwig
2022-03-04 17:43 ` Christoph Hellwig
2022-03-04 17:43 ` Christoph Hellwig
2022-03-04 17:43 ` Christoph Hellwig
2022-03-04 17:43 ` Christoph Hellwig
2022-03-04 20:18 ` Boris Ostrovsky
2022-03-04 20:18 ` Boris Ostrovsky
2022-03-04 20:18 ` Boris Ostrovsky
2022-03-04 20:18 ` Boris Ostrovsky
2022-03-04 20:18 ` Boris Ostrovsky
2022-03-04 20:18 ` Boris Ostrovsky
2022-03-04 21:03 ` Christoph Hellwig
2022-03-04 21:03 ` Christoph Hellwig
2022-03-04 21:03 ` Christoph Hellwig
2022-03-04 21:03 ` Christoph Hellwig
2022-03-04 21:03 ` Christoph Hellwig
2022-03-04 21:03 ` Christoph Hellwig
2022-03-08 21:38 ` Boris Ostrovsky
2022-03-08 21:38 ` Boris Ostrovsky
2022-03-08 21:38 ` Boris Ostrovsky
2022-03-08 21:38 ` Boris Ostrovsky
2022-03-08 21:38 ` Boris Ostrovsky
2022-03-08 21:38 ` Boris Ostrovsky
2022-03-09 6:18 ` Christoph Hellwig [this message]
2022-03-09 6:18 ` Christoph Hellwig
2022-03-09 6:18 ` Christoph Hellwig
2022-03-09 6:18 ` Christoph Hellwig
2022-03-09 6:18 ` Christoph Hellwig
2022-03-09 6:18 ` Christoph Hellwig
2022-03-09 15:18 ` Boris Ostrovsky
2022-03-09 15:18 ` Boris Ostrovsky
2022-03-09 15:18 ` Boris Ostrovsky
2022-03-09 15:18 ` Boris Ostrovsky
2022-03-09 15:18 ` Boris Ostrovsky
2022-03-09 15:18 ` Boris Ostrovsky
2022-03-01 10:53 ` [PATCH 12/12] x86: remove cruft from <asm/dma-mapping.h> Christoph Hellwig
2022-03-01 10:53 ` Christoph Hellwig
2022-03-01 10:53 ` Christoph Hellwig
2022-03-01 10:53 ` Christoph Hellwig
2022-03-01 10:53 ` Christoph Hellwig
2022-03-01 10:53 ` Christoph Hellwig
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20220309061840.GA31435@lst.de \
--to=hch@lst.de \
--cc=anshuman.khandual@arm.com \
--cc=baolu.lu@linux.intel.com \
--cc=boris.ostrovsky@oracle.com \
--cc=dwmw2@infradead.org \
--cc=iommu@lists.linux-foundation.org \
--cc=jgross@suse.com \
--cc=joro@8bytes.org \
--cc=konrad.wilk@oracle.com \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-hyperv@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mips@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-pci@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-s390@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org \
--cc=robin.murphy@arm.com \
--cc=sstabellini@kernel.org \
--cc=tboot-devel@lists.sourceforge.net \
--cc=thomas.lendacky@amd.com \
--cc=x86@kernel.org \
--cc=xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
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.