Hi, Sakari,
> -Original Message-
> From: linux-media-ow...@vger.kernel.org [mailto:linux-media-
> ow...@vger.kernel.org] On Behalf Of Sakari Ailus
> Sent: Friday, October 20, 2017 4:15 AM
> To: Zhi, Yong
> Cc: linux-me...@vger.kernel.org; sakari.ai...@linux.intel.com;
Hi, Sakari,
> -Original Message-
> From: linux-media-ow...@vger.kernel.org [mailto:linux-media-
> ow...@vger.kernel.org] On Behalf Of Sakari Ailus
> Sent: Friday, October 20, 2017 2:10 AM
> To: Zhi, Yong
> Cc: linux-me...@vger.kernel.org; sakari.ai...@linux.intel.com;
On Sat, Oct 21, 2017 at 11:47:03AM -0400, Jerome Glisse wrote:
> On Sat, Oct 21, 2017 at 04:54:40PM +1100, Balbir Singh wrote:
> > On Thu, 2017-10-19 at 12:58 -0400, Jerome Glisse wrote:
> > > On Thu, Oct 19, 2017 at 09:53:11PM +1100, Balbir Singh wrote:
> > > > On Thu, Oct 19, 2017 at 2:28 PM,
Hi Jordan,
[Lots of IOMMU people have been dropped from Cc, I've tried to add them back]
On 12/10/17 16:28, Jordan Crouse wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 12, 2017 at 01:55:32PM +0100, Jean-Philippe Brucker wrote:
>> On 12/10/17 13:05, Yisheng Xie wrote:
>> [...]
>> * An iommu_process can be bound to
On 23/10/17 12:04, Liu, Yi L wrote:
>> +idr_preload(GFP_KERNEL);
>> +spin_lock(_process_lock);
>> +pasid = idr_alloc_cyclic(_process_idr, process, domain->min_pasid,
>> + domain->max_pasid + 1, GFP_ATOMIC);
>> +process->pasid = pasid;
>
> [Liu, Yi L] If
Hi Jean,
> -Original Message-
> From: Jean-Philippe Brucker [mailto:jean-philippe.bruc...@arm.com]
> Sent: Friday, October 6, 2017 9:31 PM
> To: linux-arm-ker...@lists.infradead.org; linux-...@vger.kernel.org; linux-
> a...@vger.kernel.org; devicet...@vger.kernel.org; iommu@lists.linux-
>
This is version 0.5 of the virtio-iommu specification, the paravirtualized
IOMMU. This version addresses feedback from v0.4 and adds an event virtqueue.
Please find the specification, LaTeX sources and pdf, at:
git://linux-arm.org/virtio-iommu.git viommu/v0.5
From: Jim Quinlan
> Sent: 20 October 2017 16:28
> On Fri, Oct 20, 2017 at 10:57 AM, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> > On Fri, Oct 20, 2017 at 10:41:56AM -0400, Jim Quinlan wrote:
> >> I am not sure I understand your comment -- the size of the request
> >> shouldn't be a factor. Let's