From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Joerg Roedel Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/3] ARM: iommu: tegra: Add initial Tegra IOMMU driver Date: Fri, 18 Nov 2011 11:43:54 +0100 Message-ID: <20111118104354.GA19737@8bytes.org> References: <1321527667-12923-1-git-send-email-hdoyu@nvidia.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-tegra-owner-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org To: KyongHo Cho Cc: hdoyu-DDmLM1+adcrQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org, linux-tegra-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, iommu-cunTk1MwBs9QetFLy7KEm3xJsTq8ys+cHZ5vskTnxNA@public.gmane.org, linux-kernel-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, linux-arm-kernel-IAPFreCvJWM7uuMidbF8XUB+6BGkLq7r@public.gmane.org List-Id: linux-tegra@vger.kernel.org On Fri, Nov 18, 2011 at 07:19:53PM +0900, KyongHo Cho wrote: > I found that those patches are not IOMMU API implementations. > I wonder why they need to be located in drivers/iommu? The current effort goes into creating a generic framework for IOMMUs. These patches create their own framework which is totally the wrong direction, they even implement their own version of an IOMMU-API. I object against merging them until they are converted to the generic IOMMU-API. Joerg