Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: [PATCH char-misc-next v2 04/22] iommu: Allow iova to be used without requiring IOMMU_SUPPORT | From | Sudeep Dutt <> | Date | Mon, 05 Oct 2015 22:23:38 -0700 |
| |
On Tue, 2015-10-06 at 06:20 +0100, gregkh@linuxfoundation.org wrote: > On Tue, Oct 06, 2015 at 06:12:40AM +0100, gregkh@linuxfoundation.org wrote: > > On Mon, Oct 05, 2015 at 10:38:43AM -0700, Sudeep Dutt wrote: > > > On Mon, 2015-10-05 at 03:50 -0700, Woodhouse, David wrote: > > > > On Tue, 2015-09-29 at 18:09 -0700, Ashutosh Dixit wrote: > > > > > From: Sudeep Dutt <sudeep.dutt@intel.com> > > > > > > > > > > iova is a library which can be built without IOMMU_SUPPORT > > > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Sudeep Dutt <sudeep.dutt@intel.com> > > > > > > > > The first three of these patches are in 4.3-rc4 already. Apologies for > > > > the delay in pushing them out. > > > > > > > > This one looks sane enough too, but perhaps in that case we should move > > > > the code *out* of drivers/iommu/ and into lib/iova/ ? > > > > > > > > > > Yes, moving the code into lib/iova is the correct long term solution. I > > > have sent Greg a patch which reverts this commit since it is no longer > > > required and will create a merge conflict for him unnecessarily as well > > > with 4.3-rc4. > > > > I can handle merge issues, that's trivial. Reverting the patch > > shoulnd't really be needed, right? Let me see what happens when I merge > > to see if your patch is necessary... > > Ok, I don't think it is needed, the merge was pretty trivial. > > Can you test out my char-misc-testing branch right now to see if it's > all ok with the merge? If so, I'll move it all over to the "real" place > for it to start showing up in linux-next, i.e. my char-misc-next branch. >
Hi Greg,
I think it is best to revert this patch as it is incorrect. The iommu folder gets compiled only if IOMMU_SUPPORT is enabled so IOMMU_IOVA should indeed be included only when IOMMU_SUPPORT is enabled.
Sincere apologies for the mess here but I believe it will all get fixed up if you accept the revert of 353649e5da I sent across earlier today.
Thanks, Sudeep Dutt
| |