[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20200504131110.GA18918@lst.de>
Date: Mon, 4 May 2020 15:11:10 +0200
From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>
To: Marek Szyprowski <m.szyprowski@...sung.com>
Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>, dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org,
iommu@...ts.linux-foundation.org, linaro-mm-sig@...ts.linaro.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@....com>,
Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz <b.zolnierkie@...sung.com>,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
David Airlie <airlied@...ux.ie>,
Daniel Vetter <daniel@...ll.ch>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 00/21] DRM: fix struct sg_table nents vs. orig_nents
misuse
On Mon, May 04, 2020 at 03:05:30PM +0200, Marek Szyprowski wrote:
> Hi Christoph,
>
> On 04.05.2020 14:52, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> > On Mon, May 04, 2020 at 02:50:17PM +0200, Marek Szyprowski wrote:
> >> v2:
> >> - dropped most of the changes to drm/i915
> >> - added fixes for rcar-du, xen, media and ion
> >> - fixed a few issues pointed by kbuild test robot
> >> - added wide cc: list for each patch
> > Didn't you plan to add dma_map_sgbuf and co helper?
>
> Yes, I have a followup patches for that, but I wanted to fix the
> existing code in the first step. Then I wanted to send a wrappers and
> their application. Do you think I should do everything at once, in one
> patchset?
That would be my preference. The helpers should be mostly trivial
wrappers, so they can easily backported, and they force passing of the
correct parameters. So I don't really see a need to fix up all the 20+
places up first just to convert them to the proper API a little later.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists