On Tue, Feb 13, 2024 at 12:19:34PM +0000, Will Deacon wrote:
> > > @@ -875,15 +879,6 @@ static struct iommu_domain *arm_smmu_domain_alloc_paging(struct device *dev)
> > > mutex_init(&smmu_domain->init_mutex);
> > > spin_lock_init(&smmu_domain->cb_lock);
> > >
> > > - if (dev) {
> > > - struct arm_smmu_master_cfg *cfg = dev_iommu_priv_get(dev);
> > > -
> > > - if (arm_smmu_init_domain_context(smmu_domain, cfg->smmu, dev)) {
> > > - kfree(smmu_domain);
> > > - return NULL;
> > > - }
> > > - }
> > > -
> > > return &smmu_domain->domain;
> > > }
> >
> > Everything else is fine, you already tested with that arrangement.
>
> Partial reverts are a recipe for confusion, so I'll take this and if you'd
> like to bring back some of the hunks, please can you send a patch on top
> that does that?
The typical kernel standard is to fix bugs in patches and only reach
for a wholesale revert if the community is struggling with bug
fixing. Dmitry already tested removing that hunk, Robin explained the
issue, we understand the bug fix is to remove the
arm_smmu_init_domain_context() call. Nothing justifies a full scale
revert.
I'll send another patch if you want, but it seems like a waste of all
our time.
Jason
