On Tue, Feb 08, 2022 at 01:55:29PM +0800, Lu Baolu wrote: > Hi Greg, > > On 1/4/22 9:04 PM, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > > On Tue, Jan 04, 2022 at 08:39:11AM -0400, Jason Gunthorpe wrote: > > > On Tue, Jan 04, 2022 at 02:08:36AM -0800, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > > > > All these bus callouts still looks horrible and just create tons of > > > > boilerplate code. > > > > > > Yes, Lu - Greg asked questions then didn't respond to their answers > > > meaning he accepts them, you should stick with the v4 version. > > > > Trying to catch up on emails from the break, that was way down my list > > of things to get back to as it's messy and non-obvious. I'll revisit it > > again after 5.17-rc1 is out, this is too late for that merge window > > anyway. > > In this series we want to add calls into the iommu subsystem during > device driver binding/unbinding, so that the device DMA ownership > conflict (kernel driver vs. user-space) could be detected and avoided > before calling into device driver's .probe(). > > In this v5 series, we implemented this in the affected buses (amba/ > platform/fsl-mc/pci) which are known to support assigning devices to > user space through the vfio framework currently. And more buses are > possible to be affected in the future if they also want to support > device assignment. Christoph commented that this will create boilerplate > code in various bus drivers. > > Back to v4 of this series (please refer to below link [1]), we added > this call in the driver core if buses have provided the dma_configure() > callback (please refer to below link [2]). > > Which would you prefer, or any other suggestions? We need your guide to > move this series ahead. Please help to suggest. > > [1] https://lore.kernel.org/linux-iommu/20211217063708.1740334-1-baolu.lu@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx/ > [2] https://lore.kernel.org/linux-iommu/20211217063708.1740334-3-baolu.lu@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx/ Let me look over the series again this afternooon. thanks, greg k-h
