[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20231025121212.GB3952@nvidia.com>
Date: Wed, 25 Oct 2023 09:12:12 -0300
From: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...dia.com>
To: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>,
Lu Baolu <baolu.lu@...ux.intel.com>,
Yi Liu <yi.l.liu@...el.com>, Kevin Tian <kevin.tian@...el.com>
Cc: Joerg Roedel <joro@...tes.org>,
Jacob Pan <jacob.jun.pan@...ux.intel.com>,
Jiapeng Chong <jiapeng.chong@...ux.alibaba.com>,
Joao Martins <joao.m.martins@...cle.com>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux Next Mailing List <linux-next@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the iommufd tree with the iommu tree
On Wed, Oct 25, 2023 at 03:34:55PM +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Today's linux-next merge of the iommufd tree got a conflict in:
>
> drivers/iommu/intel/pasid.c
>
> between commit:
>
> c61c255e114c ("iommu/vt-d: Remove unused function")
>
> from the iommu tree and commits:
>
> f35f22cc760e ("iommu/vt-d: Access/Dirty bit support for SS domains")
> cbf8b441ea08 ("iommu/vt-d: Add helper to setup pasid nested translation")
>
> from the iommufd tree.
>
> I fixed it up (the latter added a use of the function removed by
> the former, so I just used the latter) and can carry the fix as
> necessary. This is now fixed as far as linux-next is concerned, but any
> non trivial
Intel folks, this is not nice :( Why was the first commit done at all
if the nesting series needs this?
Thanks Stephen, it looks good
Jason
Powered by blists - more mailing lists