On Thu, Jun 10, 2021 at 04:23:56PM +0200, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > On 10/06/2021 11:19, Thierry Reding wrote: > > On Tue, Jun 08, 2021 at 05:48:51PM +0100, Will Deacon wrote: > >> On Tue, Jun 08, 2021 at 04:38:48PM +0200, Thierry Reding wrote: > >>> On Tue, Jun 08, 2021 at 01:01:29PM +0100, Will Deacon wrote: > >>>> On Mon, Jun 07, 2021 at 10:49:10AM +0200, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > >>>>> This is the pull for you to base further SMMU aptches (prevent early SMMU > >>>>> faults). > >>>> > >>>> This is a tonne of code for me to pull into the SMMU tree given that I only > >>>> want one patch! > >>>> > >>>> Thierry, if I just stick: > >>>> > >>>> https://lore.kernel.org/r/20210603164632.1000458-4-thierry.reding@xxxxxxxxx > >>>> > >>>> on its own branch, can you stitch together whatever you need? > >>> > >>> I'm not sure I understand what you're proposing. For reference, here's > >>> the set of patches that I sent out: > >>> > >>> 1. memory: tegra: Implement SID override programming > >>> 2. dt-bindings: arm-smmu: Add Tegra186 compatible string > >>> 3. iommu/arm-smmu: Implement ->probe_finalize() > >>> 4. iommu/arm-smmu: tegra: Detect number of instances at runtime > >>> 5. iommu/arm-smmu: tegra: Implement SID override programming > >>> 6. iommu/arm-smmu: Use Tegra implementation on Tegra186 > >>> 7. arm64: tegra: Use correct compatible string for Tegra186 SMMU > >>> 8. arm64: tegra: Hook up memory controller to SMMU on Tegra186 > >>> 9. arm64: tegra: Enable SMMU support on Tegra194 > >>> > >>> Krzysztof already picked up patch 1 and I was assuming that you'd pick > >>> up 2-6 because they are to the ARM SMMU driver. However, if you're > >>> primarily interested in just patch 3, which is more "core" ARM SMMU than > >>> the rest, which are Tegra-specific, then I suppose what we could do is > >>> for you to give an Acked-by on the rest (2, 4-6) and then Krzysztof or I > >>> can pick them up and take them via ARM SoC, based on the stable branch > >>> from your tree that only has patch 3. > >> > >> I think you previously said that patch 5 depends on patch 1, so I can't > >> take 2-6 without also pulling in the memory controller queue. > >> > >>> Patch 6 touches arm-smmu-impl.c, though it's a two-line change that > >>> touches only the Tegra-specific matching bit in arm_smmu_impl_init(), so > >>> the likelihood of that conflicting with anything else is fairly small. > >>> > >>> Is that what you were proposing? > >> > >> I can queue as much or as little of 2-6 as you like, but I would like to > >> avoid pulling in the memory controller queue into the arm smmu tree. But > >> yes, whichever of those I take, I can put them on a separate branch so > >> that you're not blocked for the later patches. > >> > >> You have a better handle on the dependencies, so please tell me what works > >> for you. I just want to make sure that at least patch 3 lands in my tree, > >> so we don't get late conflicts with other driver changes. > > > > Yes, if you could pick up patch 3 and send out a link with the stable > > branch, I think Krzysztof or I could pull in that branch and pick up the > > remaining patches. It'd be good if you could also ack the remaining SMMU > > patches so that ARM SoC knows that they've been sanctioned. > > > > Krzysztof: would you be okay with picking up patches 2 and 4-6 on top of > > your memory branch for v5.14? > > You mean the iommu patches? Yes, I can take them and later explain to > Arnd/Olof why they come through me. Okay, great. Will, can you provide that stable branch? Or would you prefer if I prepared it and sent you a pull request? We're kind of running out of time, since for ARM SoC the cut-off point for new material is usually -rc6 and that's coming up pretty fast. Thierry
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
