[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20230731160409.GA8991@lst.de>
Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2023 18:04:09 +0200
From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>
To: Petr Tesarik <petrtesarik@...weicloud.com>
Cc: Stefano Stabellini <sstabellini@...nel.org>,
Russell King <linux@...linux.org.uk>,
Thomas Bogendoerfer <tsbogend@...ha.franken.de>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>,
"maintainer:X86 ARCHITECTURE (32-BIT AND 64-BIT)" <x86@...nel.org>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>,
Juergen Gross <jgross@...e.com>,
Oleksandr Tyshchenko <oleksandr_tyshchenko@...m.com>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>,
Marek Szyprowski <m.szyprowski@...sung.com>,
Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@....com>,
Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux.com>,
Pekka Enberg <penberg@...nel.org>,
David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>,
Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@....com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>,
Roman Gushchin <roman.gushchin@...ux.dev>,
Hyeonggon Yoo <42.hyeyoo@...il.com>,
Petr Tesarik <petr.tesarik.ext@...wei.com>,
Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>,
Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>,
Hans de Goede <hdegoede@...hat.com>,
James Seo <james@...iv.tech>,
James Clark <james.clark@....com>,
Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
"moderated list:XEN HYPERVISOR ARM" <xen-devel@...ts.xenproject.org>,
"moderated list:ARM PORT" <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
open list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"open list:MIPS" <linux-mips@...r.kernel.org>,
"open list:XEN SWIOTLB SUBSYSTEM" <iommu@...ts.linux.dev>,
"open list:SLAB ALLOCATOR" <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
Roberto Sassu <roberto.sassu@...weicloud.com>, petr@...arici.cz
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 0/9] Allow dynamic allocation of software IO TLB
bounce buffers
I was just going to apply this, but patch 1 seems to have a non-trivial
conflict with the is_swiotlb_active removal in pci-dma.c. Can you resend
against the current dma-mapping for-next tree?
Powered by blists - more mailing lists