On Mon, Oct 06, 2014 at 01:50:40PM +0300, Laurent Pinchart wrote:
> Hi Thierry and Will,
>
> On Monday 06 October 2014 11:52:50 Thierry Reding wrote:
> > On Fri, Oct 03, 2014 at 04:08:50PM +0100, Will Deacon wrote:
> > > On Wed, Oct 01, 2014 at 09:46:10AM +0100, Thierry Reding wrote:
> > >> On Tue
Hi Thierry and Will,
On Monday 06 October 2014 11:52:50 Thierry Reding wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 03, 2014 at 04:08:50PM +0100, Will Deacon wrote:
> > On Wed, Oct 01, 2014 at 09:46:10AM +0100, Thierry Reding wrote:
> >> On Tue, Sep 30, 2014 at 05:00:35PM +0100, Will Deacon wrote:
> >>> On Thu, Sep 25, 2
On Fri, Oct 03, 2014 at 04:08:50PM +0100, Will Deacon wrote:
> Hi Thierry,
>
> On Wed, Oct 01, 2014 at 09:46:10AM +0100, Thierry Reding wrote:
> > On Tue, Sep 30, 2014 at 05:00:35PM +0100, Will Deacon wrote:
> > > On Thu, Sep 25, 2014 at 07:40:23AM +0100, Thierry Reding wrote:
> > [...]
> > > > So
Hi Thierry,
On Wed, Oct 01, 2014 at 09:46:10AM +0100, Thierry Reding wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 30, 2014 at 05:00:35PM +0100, Will Deacon wrote:
> > On Thu, Sep 25, 2014 at 07:40:23AM +0100, Thierry Reding wrote:
> [...]
> > > So I think what we're going to need is a way to prevent the default
> > > att
On Tue, Sep 30, 2014 at 05:00:35PM +0100, Will Deacon wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 25, 2014 at 07:40:23AM +0100, Thierry Reding wrote:
[...]
> > So I think what we're going to need is a way to prevent the default
> > attachment to DMA/IOMMU. Or alternatively not associate devices with
> > IOMMU domains by
Hi Thierry,
On Thu, Sep 25, 2014 at 07:40:23AM +0100, Thierry Reding wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 24, 2014 at 05:33:38PM +0100, Will Deacon wrote:
> > On Tue, Sep 23, 2014 at 08:14:01AM +0100, Thierry Reding wrote:
> > > On Mon, Sep 22, 2014 at 06:43:37PM +0100, Will Deacon wrote:
> > > > Yup. In this cas
On Wed, Sep 24, 2014 at 05:33:38PM +0100, Will Deacon wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 23, 2014 at 08:14:01AM +0100, Thierry Reding wrote:
> > On Mon, Sep 22, 2014 at 06:43:37PM +0100, Will Deacon wrote:
> > > Yup. In this case, the iommu_dma_mapping passed to arch_setup_dma_ops
> > > contains a domain and an
On Tue, Sep 23, 2014 at 08:14:01AM +0100, Thierry Reding wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 22, 2014 at 06:43:37PM +0100, Will Deacon wrote:
> > Yup. In this case, the iommu_dma_mapping passed to arch_setup_dma_ops
> > contains a domain and an allocator for each IOMMU instance in the system.
> > It would then be
On Mon, Sep 22, 2014 at 06:43:37PM +0100, Will Deacon wrote:
> Hi Thierry,
>
> On Mon, Sep 22, 2014 at 10:19:35AM +0100, Thierry Reding wrote:
> > On Fri, Sep 12, 2014 at 05:34:55PM +0100, Will Deacon wrote:
> > [...]
> > > +static bool arm_setup_iommu_dma_ops(struct device *dev, u64 dma_base,
>
Hi Thierry,
On Mon, Sep 22, 2014 at 10:19:35AM +0100, Thierry Reding wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 12, 2014 at 05:34:55PM +0100, Will Deacon wrote:
> [...]
> > +static bool arm_setup_iommu_dma_ops(struct device *dev, u64 dma_base, u64
> > size)
> > +{
> > + struct dma_iommu_mapping *mapping;
> > +
> > +
On Monday 22 September 2014 11:19:35 Thierry Reding wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 12, 2014 at 05:34:55PM +0100, Will Deacon wrote:
> [...]
>
> > +static bool arm_setup_iommu_dma_ops(struct device *dev, u64 dma_base, u64
> > size) +{
> > + struct dma_iommu_mapping *mapping;
> > +
> > + mapping = arm_iom
On Fri, Sep 12, 2014 at 05:34:55PM +0100, Will Deacon wrote:
[...]
> +static bool arm_setup_iommu_dma_ops(struct device *dev, u64 dma_base, u64
> size)
> +{
> + struct dma_iommu_mapping *mapping;
> +
> + mapping = arm_iommu_create_mapping(dev->bus, dma_base, size);
If I understand correct
12 matches
Mail list logo
