From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Lu Baolu Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/8] iommu/vt-d: Remove IOVA handling code from non-dma_ops path Date: Fri, 20 Mar 2020 15:06:24 +0800 Message-ID: <46bf21e2-bb3e-1c1e-8dae-2c5bd8c5274f@linux.intel.com> References: <20191221150402.13868-1-murphyt7@tcd.ie> <20191221150402.13868-4-murphyt7@tcd.ie> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: Content-Language: en-US Sender: linux-arm-msm-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Tom Murphy , iommu@lists.linux-foundation.org Cc: baolu.lu@linux.intel.com, Jani Nikula , Joonas Lahtinen , Rodrigo Vivi , David Airlie , Daniel Vetter , Joerg Roedel , Will Deacon , Robin Murphy , Marek Szyprowski , Kukjin Kim , Krzysztof Kozlowski , David Woodhouse , Andy Gross , Bjorn Andersson , Matthias Brugger , Rob Clark , Heiko Stuebner , Gerald Schaefer , Thierry Reding List-Id: virtualization@lists.linuxfoundation.org On 2020/3/20 14:30, Tom Murphy wrote: > Could we merge patch 1-3 from this series? it just cleans up weird > code and merging these patches will cover some of the work needed to > move the intel iommu driver to the dma-iommu api in the future. Can you please take a look at this patch series? https://lkml.org/lkml/2020/3/13/1162 It probably makes this series easier. Best regards, baolu > > On Sat, 21 Dec 2019 at 07:04, Tom Murphy wrote: >> Remove all IOVA handling code from the non-dma_ops path in the intel >> iommu driver. >> >> There's no need for the non-dma_ops path to keep track of IOVAs. The >> whole point of the non-dma_ops path is that it allows the IOVAs to be >> handled separately. The IOVA handling code removed in this patch is >> pointless. >> >> Signed-off-by: Tom Murphy