[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <57e37ef9-c055-d6a6-2244-2c7dd243b5c1@de.ibm.com>
Date: Thu, 22 Jul 2021 21:22:58 +0200
From: Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@...ibm.com>
To: Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>, iommu@...ts.linux-foundation.org
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net>,
Claire Chang <tientzu@...omium.org>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>,
Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@....com>,
Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@...cle.com>,
Nathan Chancellor <nathan@...nel.org>,
Halil Pasic <pasic@...ux.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/4] Fix restricted DMA vs swiotlb_exit()
On 20.07.21 15:38, Will Deacon wrote:
> Hi again, folks,
>
> This is version two of the patch series I posted yesterday:
>
> https://lore.kernel.org/r/20210719123054.6844-1-will@kernel.org
>
> The only changes since v1 are:
>
> * Squash patches 2 and 3, amending the commit message accordingly
> * Add Reviewed-by and Tested-by tags from Christoph and Claire (thanks!)
>
> I'd usually leave it a bit longer between postings, but since this fixes
> issues with patches in -next I thought I'd spin a new version immediately.
>
> Cheers,
FWIW, I just bisected virtio-errors with secure execution mode
qemu-system-s390x: virtio-serial-bus: Unexpected port id 4205794771 for device virtio-serial0.0
to
commit 903cd0f315fe426c6a64c54ed389de0becb663dc
Author: Claire Chang <tientzu@...omium.org>
Date: Thu Jun 24 23:55:20 2021 +0800
swiotlb: Use is_swiotlb_force_bounce for swiotlb data bouncing
Unfortunately this patch series does NOT fix this issue, so it seems that even more
things are broken.
Any idea what else might be broken?
Shall we rather revert these patches from next until we have things under control?
Powered by blists - more mailing lists