Hi Will,
On Wednesday 21 January 2015 14:48:35 Will Deacon wrote:
On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 04:56:03PM +, Laurent Pinchart wrote:
On Monday 19 January 2015 16:06:20 Will Deacon wrote:
On Fri, Nov 14, 2014 at 08:01:56PM +, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
On Friday 14 November 2014 19:27:54
On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 04:56:03PM +, Laurent Pinchart wrote:
Hi Will,
Hi Laurent,
Thank you for the patch.
On Monday 19 January 2015 16:06:20 Will Deacon wrote:
(resurrecting an old thread)
On Fri, Nov 14, 2014 at 08:01:56PM +, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
On Friday 14 November
Hi Will,
Thank you for the patch.
On Monday 19 January 2015 16:06:20 Will Deacon wrote:
(resurrecting an old thread)
On Fri, Nov 14, 2014 at 08:01:56PM +, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
On Friday 14 November 2014 19:27:54 Will Deacon wrote:
At the moment, iommu_ops is a structure that can
(resurrecting an old thread)
On Fri, Nov 14, 2014 at 08:01:56PM +, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
On Friday 14 November 2014 19:27:54 Will Deacon wrote:
At the moment, iommu_ops is a structure that can get used for any
number of iommus of the same type, but by putting per-device private
data
Hi Will,
On Wednesday 19 November 2014 11:41:50 Will Deacon wrote:
On Wed, Nov 19, 2014 at 11:21:26AM +, Marek Szyprowski wrote:
On 2014-11-14 19:56, Will Deacon wrote:
Hello everybody,
Here is the fourth iteration of the RFC I've previously posted here:
RFCv1:
On Mon, Dec 15, 2014 at 05:21:16PM +, Laurent Pinchart wrote:
Hi Will,
Hi Laurent,
On Wednesday 19 November 2014 11:41:50 Will Deacon wrote:
+static void __remove_iommu_mapping_entry(struct kref *kref)
+{
+ struct dma_iommu_mapping_entry *entry;
+
+ entry = container_of(kref,
Hi Will,
On Monday 15 December 2014 17:34:16 Will Deacon wrote:
On Mon, Dec 15, 2014 at 05:21:16PM +, Laurent Pinchart wrote:
On Wednesday 19 November 2014 11:41:50 Will Deacon wrote:
+static void __remove_iommu_mapping_entry(struct kref *kref)
+{
+ struct dma_iommu_mapping_entry
On Fri, Nov 28, 2014 at 01:03:36PM +, jroe...@suse.de wrote:
On Wed, Nov 26, 2014 at 05:47:07PM +, Will Deacon wrote:
Joerg, would you expect this to go via your tree or via something broader
like arm-soc, with your Ack on the IOMMU bits (patches 1, 3 and 4) instead?
Hmm, I don't
Hi all,
On Tue, Nov 25, 2014 at 07:35:21AM +, Marek Szyprowski wrote:
On 2014-11-19 12:41, Will Deacon wrote:
On Wed, Nov 19, 2014 at 11:21:26AM +, Marek Szyprowski wrote:
On 2014-11-14 19:56, Will Deacon wrote:
Hello everybody,
Here is the fourth iteration of the RFC I've
Hi Will,
On 14/11/14 18:56, Will Deacon wrote:
Hello everybody,
Here is the fourth iteration of the RFC I've previously posted here:
RFCv1:
http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-arm-kernel/2014-August/283023.html
RFCv2:
Hello,
On 2014-11-19 12:41, Will Deacon wrote:
Hi Marek,
On Wed, Nov 19, 2014 at 11:21:26AM +, Marek Szyprowski wrote:
On 2014-11-14 19:56, Will Deacon wrote:
Hello everybody,
Here is the fourth iteration of the RFC I've previously posted here:
RFCv1:
Hello,
On 2014-11-14 19:56, Will Deacon wrote:
Hello everybody,
Here is the fourth iteration of the RFC I've previously posted here:
RFCv1:
http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-arm-kernel/2014-August/283023.html
RFCv2:
Hi Marek,
On Wed, Nov 19, 2014 at 11:21:26AM +, Marek Szyprowski wrote:
On 2014-11-14 19:56, Will Deacon wrote:
Hello everybody,
Here is the fourth iteration of the RFC I've previously posted here:
RFCv1:
On Friday 14 November 2014 18:56:29 Will Deacon wrote:
Here is the fourth iteration of the RFC I've previously posted here:
RFCv1:
http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-arm-kernel/2014-August/283023.html
RFCv2:
Hi Arnd,
Thanks for having a look.
On Fri, Nov 14, 2014 at 07:11:23PM +, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
On Friday 14 November 2014 18:56:29 Will Deacon wrote:
Here is the fourth iteration of the RFC I've previously posted here:
RFCv1:
On Friday 14 November 2014 19:27:54 Will Deacon wrote:
At the moment, iommu_ops is a structure that can get used for any
number of iommus of the same type, but by putting per-device private
data into the same structure you have to duplicate it per instance.
I'm not sure I agree -- the
16 matches
Mail list logo
