From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Julien Grall <julien.grall@linaro.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 05/13] xen/iommu: arm: Remove temporary
	the SMMU driver
Date: Fri, 20 Feb 2015 14:07:45 +0000
Message-ID: <54E73FB1.6050701@linaro.org>
References: <1422643768-23614-1-git-send-email-julien.grall@linaro.org>			
	<1422643768-23614-6-git-send-email-julien.grall@linaro.org>		
	<1424434719.30924.198.camel@citrix.com>
	<54E72E3E.5040703@linaro.org>	
	<1424440075.30924.245.camel@citrix.com>
	<54E73C57.5060103@linaro.org>
	<1424441184.30924.259.camel@citrix.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Return-path: <xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org>
Received: from mail6.bemta14.messagelabs.com ([193.109.254.103])
	by lists.xen.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72)
	(envelope-from <julien.grall@linaro.org>) id 1YOoFa-0004aQ-A0
	for xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org; Fri, 20 Feb 2015 14:08:14 +0000
Received: by mail-wi0-f179.google.com with SMTP id hi2so3177572wib.0
	for <xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org>;
	Fri, 20 Feb 2015 06:08:12 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <1424441184.30924.259.camel@citrix.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.xen.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/xen-devel>,
	<mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xen.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Post: <mailto:xen-devel@lists.xen.org>
List-Help: <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xen.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.xen.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>,
	<mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xen.org?subject=subscribe>
Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org
Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org
To: Ian Campbell <ian.campbell@citrix.com>
Cc: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org, tim@xen.org, stefano.stabellini@citrix.com
List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org

On 20/02/15 14:06, Ian Campbell wrote:
> On Fri, 2015-02-20 at 13:53 +0000, Julien Grall wrote:
>> On 20/02/15 13:47, Ian Campbell wrote:
>>> On Fri, 2015-02-20 at 12:53 +0000, Julien Grall wrote:
>>> The main thing I'm worried about is if the bisector is searching a range
>>> which includes this change looking for some unrelated change and this
>>> commit causes some sort of spurious issue or perturbation which confuses
>>> the bisector.
>>>
>>> Perhaps a temporary stub could be put in which just marks SMMUs as used
>>> by Xen but doesn't actually use them?
>>
>> The changes for SMMU on the Calxeda DT never reached upstream.
>> So at the moment, we don't have any device tree with SMMU nodes inside.
>>
>> So it won't impact to the bisector.
> 
> Great, thanks.
> 
> Maybe not worthy of the main changelog, but could you put it after the
> --- so I don't forget and ask the same thing next time please.

Will do.

Regards,

-- 
Julien Grall