[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <95d6e963-7f30-1d9c-99d7-0f6cc1589997@samsung.com>
Date: Wed, 5 Jun 2019 15:18:10 +0200
From: Marek Szyprowski <m.szyprowski@...sung.com>
To: Rob Clark <robdclark@...il.com>, Tomasz Figa <tfiga@...omium.org>
Cc: freedreno <freedreno@...ts.freedesktop.org>,
Daniel Vetter <daniel@...ll.ch>,
Frank Rowand <frowand.list@...il.com>,
devicetree@...r.kernel.org, David Airlie <airlied@...ux.ie>,
linux-arm-msm <linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org>,
Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>,
Doug Anderson <dianders@...omium.org>,
dri-devel <dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux IOMMU <iommu@...ts.linux-foundation.org>,
Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
Sean Paul <seanpaul@...omium.org>,
Vivek Gautam <vivek.gautam@...eaurora.org>,
Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@....com>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>
Subject: Re: [Freedreno] [PATCH] of/device: add blacklist for iommu dma_ops
Hi Rob,
On 2019-06-05 14:57, Rob Clark wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 4, 2019 at 11:58 PM Tomasz Figa <tfiga@...omium.org> wrote:
>> But first of all, I remember Marek already submitted some patches long
>> ago that extended struct driver with some flag that means that the
>> driver doesn't want the IOMMU to be attached before probe. Why
>> wouldn't that work? Sounds like a perfect opt-out solution.
> Actually, yeah.. we should do that. That is the simplest solution.
Tomasz has very good memory. It took me a while to find that old patches:
https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/4677251/
https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/4677941/
https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/4677401/
It looks that my idea was a bit ahead of its time ;)
Best regards
--
Marek Szyprowski, PhD
Samsung R&D Institute Poland
Powered by blists - more mailing lists