RE: [PATCH v2 1/4] iommu/arm-smmu-v3: Add feature detection for HTTU

[Shameerali Kolothum Thodi <shameerali.kolothum.thodi@huawei.com>]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@nvidia.com>
> Sent: Wednesday, April 24, 2024 1:24 PM
> To: Ryan Roberts <ryan.roberts@arm.com>
> Cc: Shameerali Kolothum Thodi <shameerali.kolothum.thodi@huawei.com>;
> iommu@lists.linux.dev; linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org; joro@8bytes.org;
> kevin.tian@intel.com; nicolinc@nvidia.com; mshavit@google.com;
> robin.murphy@arm.com; will@kernel.org; joao.m.martins@oracle.com;
> jiangkunkun <jiangkunkun@huawei.com>; zhukeqian
> <zhukeqian1@huawei.com>; Linuxarm <linuxarm@huawei.com>
> Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/4] iommu/arm-smmu-v3: Add feature detection for
> HTTU
> 
> On Wed, Apr 24, 2024 at 11:04:43AM +0100, Ryan Roberts wrote:
> > On 23/04/2024 15:52, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> > > On Tue, Apr 23, 2024 at 03:41:30PM +0100, Ryan Roberts wrote:
> > >> Hi,
> > >>
> > >> I'm aiming to (slowly) get more involved with SMMU activities, although I'm
> sure
> > >> it will take a while to get up to speed and provide useful input. It was
> > >> suggested that this series would be a useful starting point to dip my toe in.
> > >> Please bear with me while I ask stupid questions...
> > >
> > > Nice!
> > >
> > > I would like to see this merged as it was part of the original three
> > > implementations for iommufd dirty tracking. The other two have been
> > > merged for a long time now..
> >
> > My understanding is that this series should pretty much apply on top of
> > mainline, is that correct? (in practice there are some conflicts, but I think
> > they are trivial).
> 
> It was originally based on my part 2, but I suspect it could apply
> easially on top of part 2a. I don't think it is worth rebasing to
> v6.9-rc since I expect Will to take 2a.

But isn't arm_smmu_domain_alloc_user() gets introduced only in part 3
of the series? Do we plan to support DIRTY_TRACKING with domain_alloc( )
itself by default? 

Thanks,
Shameer