[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <e9a8d649-40b0-4595-a702-9fd8164e5326@intel.com>
Date: Tue, 7 May 2024 11:51:46 +0200
From: Alexander Lobakin <aleksander.lobakin@...el.com>
To: Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>
CC: "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>, Eric Dumazet
<edumazet@...gle.com>, Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>, Paolo Abeni
<pabeni@...hat.com>, Marek Szyprowski <m.szyprowski@...sung.com>, "Robin
Murphy" <robin.murphy@....com>, Joerg Roedel <joro@...tes.org>, Will Deacon
<will@...nel.org>, "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>, Magnus Karlsson
<magnus.karlsson@...el.com>, <nex.sw.ncis.osdt.itp.upstreaming@...el.com>,
<bpf@...r.kernel.org>, <netdev@...r.kernel.org>, <iommu@...ts.linux.dev>,
<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v5 6/7] page_pool: check for DMA sync shortcut
earlier
From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>
Date: Mon, 6 May 2024 13:50:43 +0200
> The first hunk here fails when trying to apply it to the 6.9-rc6
> based dma-mapping for-next tree.
>
> Should I go ahead and just apply the first three patches? Or do
> we need a shared branch with something?
My CI fails now fails to compile this patch when !HAS_DMA. Let me fix
this, rebase on top of your tree and resend? We'll resolve this conflict
in linux-next then.
Thanks,
Olek
Powered by blists - more mailing lists