[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20190713080829.GA17920@lst.de>
Date: Sat, 13 Jul 2019 10:08:29 +0200
From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>
To: Halil Pasic <pasic@...ux.ibm.com>
Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>,
Thiago Jung Bauermann <bauerman@...ux.ibm.com>,
x86@...nel.org, iommu@...ts.linux-foundation.org,
linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org,
linux-s390@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
Marek Szyprowski <m.szyprowski@...sung.com>,
Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@....com>,
Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@...cle.com>,
Alexey Dobriyan <adobriyan@...il.com>,
Mike Anderson <andmike@...ux.ibm.com>,
Ram Pai <linuxram@...ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] fs/core/vmcore: Move sev_active() reference to x86
arch code
On Fri, Jul 12, 2019 at 05:42:49PM +0200, Halil Pasic wrote:
>
> Will do! I guess I should do the patch against the for-next branch of the
> dma-mapping tree. But that branch does not have the s390 support patches (yet?).
> To fix it I need both e67a5ed1f86f and 64e1f0c531d1 "s390/mm: force
> swiotlb for protected virtualization" (Halil Pasic, 2018-09-13). Or
> should I wait for e67a5ed1f86f landing in mainline?
I've rebased the dma-mapping for-next branch to latest mainline as of
today that has both commits.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists