[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <Y8HNJfz9R1IidJPq@8bytes.org>
Date: Fri, 13 Jan 2023 22:29:09 +0100
From: Joerg Roedel <joro@...tes.org>
To: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...pe.ca>
Cc: Lu Baolu <baolu.lu@...ux.intel.com>, Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>,
Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@....com>,
Vasant Hegde <vasant.hegde@....com>,
Chunyan Zhang <zhang.lyra@...il.com>,
Sven Peter <sven@...npeter.dev>, iommu@...ts.linux.dev,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Joerg Roedel <jroedel@...e.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] iommu/ipmmu-vmsa: Remove ipmmu_utlb_disable()
On Fri, Jan 13, 2023 at 03:45:46PM -0400, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 13, 2023 at 08:25:17PM +0100, Joerg Roedel wrote:
> > In general it is a good idea to at least compile-test every file that is
> > changed in a patch-set before sending it out and not rely on 0-day bot
> > for that.
>
> Against every arch combination? This is why we have automation bots :(
No, not every combination. But if possible please compile-test each
changed file with a .config that pulls that source file in. Lots of
drivers can be enabled just with COMPILE_TEST on x86 or be catched with
a generic ARM/ARM64 config which enables all IOMMU drivers. PAMU is a
bit more difficult as it requires a PPC-32 bit config, but that is the
exception.
A full kernel build is usually also not necessary, often a 'make
drivers/iommu/' with a given config is enough.
That is also how I compile-test the IOMMU tree before I push changes
out. There are per-arch configurations which select all IOMMU drivers on
that arch. Only for X86 I do the full allnoconfig, defconfig,
allmodconfig and allyesconfig cycle (each for 32 and 64 bit).
That certainly does not catch everything, but a lot of compile issues can be
found that way. And for patch-sets only touching, for example, VT-d it
is still enough to only compile-test on x86. A patch-set touching that
much drivers is rather the exception.
Regards,
Joerg
Powered by blists - more mailing lists