Re: [PATCH 0/8] dma-mapping: migrate to physical address-based API

2025-07-31 Thread Matthew Wilcox
Hi Robin, I don't know the DMA mapping code well and haven't reviewed this patch set in particular, but I wanted to comment on some of the things you say here. > Marek, I'm surprised that even you aren't seeing why that would at best be > pointless churn. The fundamental design of dma_map_page()

Re: [PATCH 0/8] dma-mapping: migrate to physical address-based API

2025-07-30 Thread Leon Romanovsky
On Wed, Jul 30, 2025 at 11:28:18AM -0300, Jason Gunthorpe wrote: > On Wed, Jul 30, 2025 at 04:40:26PM +0300, Leon Romanovsky wrote: <...> > > The most reasonable way to prevent DMA_ATTR_SKIP_CPU_SYNC leakage is to > > introduce new DMA attribute (let's call it DMA_ATTR_MMIO for now) and > > pass

Re: [PATCH 0/8] dma-mapping: migrate to physical address-based API

2025-07-30 Thread Marek Szyprowski
On 30.07.2025 13:11, Robin Murphy wrote: > On 2025-07-08 11:27 am, Marek Szyprowski wrote: >> On 30.06.2025 15:38, Christoph Hellwig wrote: >>> On Fri, Jun 27, 2025 at 08:02:13PM +0300, Leon Romanovsky wrote: > Thanks for this rework! I assume that the next step is to add > map_phys >

Re: [PATCH 0/8] dma-mapping: migrate to physical address-based API

2025-07-30 Thread Jason Gunthorpe
On Wed, Jul 30, 2025 at 04:40:26PM +0300, Leon Romanovsky wrote: > > The natural working unit for whatever replaces dma_map_page() will be > > whatever the replacement for alloc_pages() returns, and the replacement for > > kmap_atomic() operates on. Until that exists (and I simply cannot believe i

Re: [PATCH 0/8] dma-mapping: migrate to physical address-based API

2025-07-30 Thread Leon Romanovsky
On Wed, Jul 30, 2025 at 12:11:32PM +0100, Robin Murphy wrote: > On 2025-07-08 11:27 am, Marek Szyprowski wrote: > > On 30.06.2025 15:38, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > > > On Fri, Jun 27, 2025 at 08:02:13PM +0300, Leon Romanovsky wrote: > > > > > Thanks for this rework! I assume that the next step is t

Re: [PATCH 0/8] dma-mapping: migrate to physical address-based API

2025-07-30 Thread Robin Murphy
On 2025-07-08 11:27 am, Marek Szyprowski wrote: On 30.06.2025 15:38, Christoph Hellwig wrote: On Fri, Jun 27, 2025 at 08:02:13PM +0300, Leon Romanovsky wrote: Thanks for this rework! I assume that the next step is to add map_phys callback also to the dma_map_ops and teach various dma-mapping pr

Re: [PATCH 0/8] dma-mapping: migrate to physical address-based API

2025-07-29 Thread Jason Gunthorpe
On Fri, Jul 25, 2025 at 09:05:46PM +0100, Robin Murphy wrote: > But given what we do already know of from decades of experience, obvious > question: For the tiny minority of users who know full well when they're > dealing with a non-page-backed physical address, what's wrong with using > dma_map_r

Re: [PATCH 0/8] dma-mapping: migrate to physical address-based API

2025-07-25 Thread Robin Murphy
On 2025-06-25 2:18 pm, Leon Romanovsky wrote: This series refactors the DMA mapping to use physical addresses as the primary interface instead of page+offset parameters. This change aligns the DMA API with the underlying hardware reality where DMA operations work with physical addresses, not page

Re: [PATCH 0/8] dma-mapping: migrate to physical address-based API

2025-07-08 Thread Marek Szyprowski
On 08.07.2025 14:56, Marek Szyprowski wrote: > On 08.07.2025 14:06, Leon Romanovsky wrote: >> On Tue, Jul 08, 2025 at 01:45:20PM +0200, Marek Szyprowski wrote: >>> On 08.07.2025 13:00, Leon Romanovsky wrote: On Tue, Jul 08, 2025 at 12:27:09PM +0200, Marek Szyprowski wrote: > On 30.06.2025

Re: [PATCH 0/8] dma-mapping: migrate to physical address-based API

2025-07-08 Thread Marek Szyprowski
On 08.07.2025 14:06, Leon Romanovsky wrote: > On Tue, Jul 08, 2025 at 01:45:20PM +0200, Marek Szyprowski wrote: >> On 08.07.2025 13:00, Leon Romanovsky wrote: >>> On Tue, Jul 08, 2025 at 12:27:09PM +0200, Marek Szyprowski wrote: On 30.06.2025 15:38, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > On Fri, Jun 2

Re: [PATCH 0/8] dma-mapping: migrate to physical address-based API

2025-07-08 Thread Leon Romanovsky
On Tue, Jul 08, 2025 at 01:45:20PM +0200, Marek Szyprowski wrote: > On 08.07.2025 13:00, Leon Romanovsky wrote: > > On Tue, Jul 08, 2025 at 12:27:09PM +0200, Marek Szyprowski wrote: > >> On 30.06.2025 15:38, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > >>> On Fri, Jun 27, 2025 at 08:02:13PM +0300, Leon Romanovsky wr

Re: [PATCH 0/8] dma-mapping: migrate to physical address-based API

2025-07-08 Thread Marek Szyprowski
On 08.07.2025 13:00, Leon Romanovsky wrote: > On Tue, Jul 08, 2025 at 12:27:09PM +0200, Marek Szyprowski wrote: >> On 30.06.2025 15:38, Christoph Hellwig wrote: >>> On Fri, Jun 27, 2025 at 08:02:13PM +0300, Leon Romanovsky wrote: > Thanks for this rework! I assume that the next step is to add m

Re: [PATCH 0/8] dma-mapping: migrate to physical address-based API

2025-07-08 Thread Leon Romanovsky
On Tue, Jul 08, 2025 at 12:27:09PM +0200, Marek Szyprowski wrote: > On 30.06.2025 15:38, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > > On Fri, Jun 27, 2025 at 08:02:13PM +0300, Leon Romanovsky wrote: > >>> Thanks for this rework! I assume that the next step is to add map_phys > >>> callback also to the dma_map_ops

Re: [PATCH 0/8] dma-mapping: migrate to physical address-based API

2025-07-08 Thread Marek Szyprowski
On 30.06.2025 15:38, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > On Fri, Jun 27, 2025 at 08:02:13PM +0300, Leon Romanovsky wrote: >>> Thanks for this rework! I assume that the next step is to add map_phys >>> callback also to the dma_map_ops and teach various dma-mapping providers >>> to use it to avoid more phys-t

Re: [PATCH 0/8] dma-mapping: migrate to physical address-based API

2025-07-05 Thread Leon Romanovsky
On Fri, Jun 27, 2025 at 08:02:13PM +0300, Leon Romanovsky wrote: > On Fri, Jun 27, 2025 at 03:44:10PM +0200, Marek Szyprowski wrote: > > On 25.06.2025 15:18, Leon Romanovsky wrote: > > > This series refactors the DMA mapping to use physical addresses > > > as the primary interface instead of page+o

Re: [PATCH 0/8] dma-mapping: migrate to physical address-based API

2025-06-30 Thread Christoph Hellwig
On Fri, Jun 27, 2025 at 08:02:13PM +0300, Leon Romanovsky wrote: > > Thanks for this rework! I assume that the next step is to add map_phys > > callback also to the dma_map_ops and teach various dma-mapping providers > > to use it to avoid more phys-to-page-to-phys conversions. > > Probably Chri

Re: [PATCH 0/8] dma-mapping: migrate to physical address-based API

2025-06-27 Thread Leon Romanovsky
On Fri, Jun 27, 2025 at 03:44:10PM +0200, Marek Szyprowski wrote: > On 25.06.2025 15:18, Leon Romanovsky wrote: > > This series refactors the DMA mapping to use physical addresses > > as the primary interface instead of page+offset parameters. This > > change aligns the DMA API with the underlying

Re: [PATCH 0/8] dma-mapping: migrate to physical address-based API

2025-06-27 Thread Marek Szyprowski
On 25.06.2025 15:18, Leon Romanovsky wrote: > This series refactors the DMA mapping to use physical addresses > as the primary interface instead of page+offset parameters. This > change aligns the DMA API with the underlying hardware reality where > DMA operations work with physical addresses, not

[PATCH 0/8] dma-mapping: migrate to physical address-based API

2025-06-25 Thread Leon Romanovsky
This series refactors the DMA mapping to use physical addresses as the primary interface instead of page+offset parameters. This change aligns the DMA API with the underlying hardware reality where DMA operations work with physical addresses, not page structures. The series consists of 8 patches t

Re: [PATCH 0/8] KVM: Remove include/kvm, standardize includes

2025-06-13 Thread Oliver Upton
On Thu, Jun 12, 2025 at 06:56:53AM +0200, Paolo Bonzini wrote: > On 6/11/25 02:10, Sean Christopherson wrote: > > Kill off include/kvm (through file moves/renames), and standardize the set > > of > > KVM includes across all architectures. > > > > This conflicts with Colton's partioned PMU series[

Re: [PATCH 0/8] KVM: Remove include/kvm, standardize includes

2025-06-11 Thread Paolo Bonzini
On 6/11/25 02:10, Sean Christopherson wrote: Kill off include/kvm (through file moves/renames), and standardize the set of KVM includes across all architectures. This conflicts with Colton's partioned PMU series[1], but this should work as a nice prepatory cleanup for the partitioned PMU work (a

[PATCH 0/8] KVM: Remove include/kvm, standardize includes

2025-06-10 Thread Sean Christopherson
Kill off include/kvm (through file moves/renames), and standardize the set of KVM includes across all architectures. This conflicts with Colton's partioned PMU series[1], but this should work as a nice prepatory cleanup for the partitioned PMU work (and hopefully can land sooner). Note, these pat

Re: [PATCH 0/8] ASoC: codecs: More const and unused member cleanups

2025-06-09 Thread Mark Brown
On Wed, 28 May 2025 21:59:54 +0200, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > Make static data const for code safety and drop some unused fields in > structs. > > This is based on for-v6.16 branch in ASoC tree for context in wcd938x > driver. > > Best regards, > Krzysztof > > [...] Applied to https://gi

Re: [PATCH 0/8] ASoC: codecs: More const and unused member cleanups

2025-05-29 Thread Srinivas Kandagatla
On 5/28/25 8:59 PM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > Make static data const for code safety and drop some unused fields in > structs. > > This is based on for-v6.16 branch in ASoC tree for context in wcd938x > driver. > > Best regards, > Krzysztof > > --- > Krzysztof Kozlowski (8): > ASoC:

Re: [PATCH 0/8] ASoC: codecs: More const and unused member cleanups

2025-05-29 Thread Krzysztof Kozlowski
On 29/05/2025 11:33, Srinivas Kandagatla wrote: > > > On 5/28/25 8:59 PM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: >> Make static data const for code safety and drop some unused fields in >> structs. >> >> This is based on for-v6.16 branch in ASoC tree for context in wcd938x >> driver. >> >> Best regards, >> K

[PATCH 0/8] ASoC: codecs: More const and unused member cleanups

2025-05-28 Thread Krzysztof Kozlowski
Make static data const for code safety and drop some unused fields in structs. This is based on for-v6.16 branch in ASoC tree for context in wcd938x driver. Best regards, Krzysztof --- Krzysztof Kozlowski (8): ASoC: codecs: Constify regmap configuration static variables ASoC: fsl: Co

Re: [RFC PATCH 0/8] Reimplement huge pages without hugepd on powerpc 8xx

2024-05-22 Thread Christophe Leroy
Le 17/05/2024 à 16:27, Oscar Salvador a écrit : > On Mon, Mar 25, 2024 at 03:55:53PM +0100, Christophe Leroy wrote: >> This series reimplements hugepages with hugepd on powerpc 8xx. >> >> Unlike most architectures, powerpc 8xx HW requires a two-level >> pagetable topology for all page sizes. So a

Re: [RFC PATCH 0/8] Reimplement huge pages without hugepd on powerpc 8xx

2024-05-17 Thread Oscar Salvador
On Mon, Mar 25, 2024 at 03:55:53PM +0100, Christophe Leroy wrote: > This series reimplements hugepages with hugepd on powerpc 8xx. > > Unlike most architectures, powerpc 8xx HW requires a two-level > pagetable topology for all page sizes. So a leaf PMD-contig approach > is not feasible as such. >

Re: [RFC PATCH 0/8] Reimplement huge pages without hugepd on powerpc 8xx

2024-04-16 Thread Peter Xu
On Tue, Apr 16, 2024 at 10:58:33AM +, Christophe Leroy wrote: > > > Le 15/04/2024 à 21:12, Christophe Leroy a écrit : > > > > > > Le 12/04/2024 à 16:30, Peter Xu a écrit : > >> On Fri, Apr 12, 2024 at 02:08:03PM +, Christophe Leroy wrote: > >>> > >>> > >>> Le 11/04/2024 à 18:15, Peter X

Re: [RFC PATCH 0/8] Reimplement huge pages without hugepd on powerpc 8xx

2024-04-16 Thread Christophe Leroy
Le 15/04/2024 à 21:12, Christophe Leroy a écrit : > > > Le 12/04/2024 à 16:30, Peter Xu a écrit : >> On Fri, Apr 12, 2024 at 02:08:03PM +, Christophe Leroy wrote: >>> >>> >>> Le 11/04/2024 à 18:15, Peter Xu a écrit : On Mon, Mar 25, 2024 at 01:38:40PM -0300, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:

Re: [RFC PATCH 0/8] Reimplement huge pages without hugepd on powerpc 8xx

2024-04-15 Thread Christophe Leroy
Le 12/04/2024 à 16:30, Peter Xu a écrit : > On Fri, Apr 12, 2024 at 02:08:03PM +, Christophe Leroy wrote: >> >> >> Le 11/04/2024 à 18:15, Peter Xu a écrit : >>> On Mon, Mar 25, 2024 at 01:38:40PM -0300, Jason Gunthorpe wrote: On Mon, Mar 25, 2024 at 03:55:53PM +0100, Christophe Leroy wro

Re: [RFC PATCH 0/8] Reimplement huge pages without hugepd on powerpc 8xx

2024-04-12 Thread Peter Xu
On Fri, Apr 12, 2024 at 02:08:03PM +, Christophe Leroy wrote: > > > Le 11/04/2024 à 18:15, Peter Xu a écrit : > > On Mon, Mar 25, 2024 at 01:38:40PM -0300, Jason Gunthorpe wrote: > >> On Mon, Mar 25, 2024 at 03:55:53PM +0100, Christophe Leroy wrote: > >>> This series reimplements hugepages wi

Re: [RFC PATCH 0/8] Reimplement huge pages without hugepd on powerpc 8xx

2024-04-12 Thread Christophe Leroy
Le 11/04/2024 à 18:15, Peter Xu a écrit : > On Mon, Mar 25, 2024 at 01:38:40PM -0300, Jason Gunthorpe wrote: >> On Mon, Mar 25, 2024 at 03:55:53PM +0100, Christophe Leroy wrote: >>> This series reimplements hugepages with hugepd on powerpc 8xx. >>> >>> Unlike most architectures, powerpc 8xx HW re

Re: [RFC PATCH 0/8] Reimplement huge pages without hugepd on powerpc 8xx

2024-04-11 Thread Peter Xu
On Mon, Mar 25, 2024 at 01:38:40PM -0300, Jason Gunthorpe wrote: > On Mon, Mar 25, 2024 at 03:55:53PM +0100, Christophe Leroy wrote: > > This series reimplements hugepages with hugepd on powerpc 8xx. > > > > Unlike most architectures, powerpc 8xx HW requires a two-level > > pagetable topology for

Re: [RFC PATCH 0/8] Reimplement huge pages without hugepd on powerpc 8xx

2024-03-25 Thread Jason Gunthorpe
On Mon, Mar 25, 2024 at 03:55:53PM +0100, Christophe Leroy wrote: > This series reimplements hugepages with hugepd on powerpc 8xx. > > Unlike most architectures, powerpc 8xx HW requires a two-level > pagetable topology for all page sizes. So a leaf PMD-contig approach > is not feasible as such. >

[RFC PATCH 0/8] Reimplement huge pages without hugepd on powerpc 8xx

2024-03-25 Thread Christophe Leroy
This series reimplements hugepages with hugepd on powerpc 8xx. Unlike most architectures, powerpc 8xx HW requires a two-level pagetable topology for all page sizes. So a leaf PMD-contig approach is not feasible as such. Possible sizes are 4k, 16k, 512k and 8M. First level (PGD/PMD) covers 4M per

Re: [PATCH 0/8] devm_led_classdev_register() usage problem

2023-11-27 Thread Andy Shevchenko
On Sat, Nov 25, 2023 at 03:47:41AM +0300, George Stark wrote: > On 11/24/23 18:28, Andy Shevchenko wrote: > > On Wed, Oct 25, 2023 at 04:07:29PM +0300, George Stark wrote: > > > Lots of drivers use devm_led_classdev_register() to register their led > > > objects > > > and let the kernel free those

Re: [PATCH 0/8] devm_led_classdev_register() usage problem

2023-11-25 Thread Jonathan Cameron
On Sat, 25 Nov 2023 03:47:41 +0300 George Stark wrote: > Hello Andy > > Thanks for the review. > > On 11/24/23 18:28, Andy Shevchenko wrote: > > On Wed, Oct 25, 2023 at 04:07:29PM +0300, George Stark wrote: > >> Lots of drivers use devm_led_classdev_register() to register their led > >> obje

Re: [PATCH 0/8] devm_led_classdev_register() usage problem

2023-11-24 Thread George Stark
Hello Andy Thanks for the review. On 11/24/23 18:28, Andy Shevchenko wrote: On Wed, Oct 25, 2023 at 04:07:29PM +0300, George Stark wrote: Lots of drivers use devm_led_classdev_register() to register their led objects and let the kernel free those leds at the driver's remove stage. It can lead

Re: [PATCH 0/8] devm_led_classdev_register() usage problem

2023-11-24 Thread Andy Shevchenko
On Wed, Oct 25, 2023 at 04:07:29PM +0300, George Stark wrote: > Lots of drivers use devm_led_classdev_register() to register their led objects > and let the kernel free those leds at the driver's remove stage. > It can lead to a problem due to led_classdev_unregister() > implementation calls led_se

Re: [PATCH 0/8] devm_led_classdev_register() usage problem

2023-11-24 Thread Andy Shevchenko
On Sat, Nov 4, 2023 at 9:17 AM George Stark wrote: > > Hello Andy > > Could you please take a look at this patch series? > > I've just found your post on habr about devres API misusing and I think > this is just another case. Just had a look, sorry for the delay. By quickly reading it seems to be

Re: [PATCH 0/8] generic command line v6

2023-11-22 Thread Christophe Leroy
Le 10/11/2023 à 02:38, Daniel Walker a écrit : > This release is an up-rev of the v5 patches. No additional features have > been added. Some changes were mode to function names and some changes to > Kconfig dependencies. Also updated the config conversion for mips. > > There are a number of peop

Re: [PATCH 0/8] generic command line v6

2023-11-09 Thread Andrew Morton
On Fri, 10 Nov 2023 02:22:27 + "Daniel Walker (danielwa)" wrote: > On Thu, Nov 09, 2023 at 05:51:42PM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote: > > On Thu, 9 Nov 2023 17:38:04 -0800 Daniel Walker wrote: > > > > > This release is an up-rev of the v5 patches. No additional features have > > > been added.

Re: [PATCH 0/8] generic command line v6

2023-11-09 Thread Daniel Walker (danielwa)
On Thu, Nov 09, 2023 at 05:51:42PM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote: > On Thu, 9 Nov 2023 17:38:04 -0800 Daniel Walker wrote: > > > This release is an up-rev of the v5 patches. No additional features have > > been added. Some changes were mode to function names and some changes to > > Kconfig dependen

Re: [PATCH 0/8] generic command line v6

2023-11-09 Thread Andrew Morton
On Thu, 9 Nov 2023 17:38:04 -0800 Daniel Walker wrote: > This release is an up-rev of the v5 patches. No additional features have > been added. Some changes were mode to function names and some changes to > Kconfig dependencies. Also updated the config conversion for mips. > > There are a numbe

[PATCH 0/8] generic command line v6

2023-11-09 Thread Daniel Walker
This release is an up-rev of the v5 patches. No additional features have been added. Some changes were mode to function names and some changes to Kconfig dependencies. Also updated the config conversion for mips. There are a number of people who have expressed interest in these patches either by a

Re: [PATCH 0/8] devm_led_classdev_register() usage problem

2023-11-06 Thread Christophe Leroy
Le 25/10/2023 à 15:07, George Stark a écrit : > Lots of drivers use devm_led_classdev_register() to register their led objects > and let the kernel free those leds at the driver's remove stage. > It can lead to a problem due to led_classdev_unregister() > implementation calls led_set_brightness()

Re: [PATCH 0/8] devm_led_classdev_register() usage problem

2023-11-04 Thread George Stark
Hello Andy Could you please take a look at this patch series? I've just found your post on habr about devres API misusing and I think this is just another case. On 10/25/23 16:07, George Stark wrote: Lots of drivers use devm_led_classdev_register() to register their led objects and let the k

[PATCH 0/8] devm_led_classdev_register() usage problem

2023-10-25 Thread George Stark
Lots of drivers use devm_led_classdev_register() to register their led objects and let the kernel free those leds at the driver's remove stage. It can lead to a problem due to led_classdev_unregister() implementation calls led_set_brightness() to turn off the led. led_set_brightness() may call one

[PATCH 0/8] iommu: Convert dart & iommufd to the new domain_alloc_paging()

2023-09-22 Thread Jason Gunthorpe
Continue converting drivers to the new interface. Introduce ops->blocked_domain to hold the global static BLOCKED domain and convert all drivers supporting BLOCKED to use it. This makes it trivial for dart and iommufd to convert over to domain_alloc_paging(). There are six drivers remaining: dri

[PATCH 0/8] sysctl: Remove sentinel elements from arch

2023-09-06 Thread Joel Granados via B4 Relay
From: Joel Granados What? These commits remove the sentinel element (last empty element) from the sysctl arrays of all the files under the "arch/" directory that use a sysctl array for registration. The merging of the preparation patches (in https://lore.kernel.org/all/zo5yx5jfoggi%2f...@bombadil

Re: [PATCH 0/8] RTAS changes for 6.4

2023-04-26 Thread Michael Ellerman
On Mon, 06 Mar 2023 15:33:39 -0600, Nathan Lynch wrote: > Proposed changes for the RTAS subsystem and client code. > > Fixes that are subject to backporting are at the front of the queue, > followed by documentation and cleanups, with enhancements at the end. > > Noteworthy changes: > * Change sy

[PATCH 0/8] powerpc/fsl_uli1575: Cleanups

2023-04-08 Thread Pali Rohár
This patch series contains cleanups for fsl_uli1575 driver. This patch series is prerequisity for another patch series: "powerpc/85xx: p2020: Create one unified machine description" Christophe Leroy (1): powerpc/fsl_uli1575: Misc cleanup Pali Rohár (7): powerpc/85xx: mpc85xx_ds: Simplify mpc

Re: (subset) [PATCH 0/8] RTAS changes for 6.4

2023-04-05 Thread Michael Ellerman
On Mon, 06 Mar 2023 15:33:39 -0600, Nathan Lynch wrote: > Proposed changes for the RTAS subsystem and client code. > > Fixes that are subject to backporting are at the front of the queue, > followed by documentation and cleanups, with enhancements at the end. > > Noteworthy changes: > * Change sy

[PATCH 0/8] RTAS changes for 6.4

2023-03-06 Thread Nathan Lynch via B4 Relay
Proposed changes for the RTAS subsystem and client code. Fixes that are subject to backporting are at the front of the queue, followed by documentation and cleanups, with enhancements at the end. Noteworthy changes: * Change sys_rtas() to consume -2/990x statuses instead of returning them to us

[PATCH 0/8] powerpc: improve copy_thread

2023-01-31 Thread Nicholas Piggin
The way copy_thread works, particularly with kernel threads and kernel created user threads is a bit muddled and confusing. This series tries to straighten things out a bit. Thanks, Nick Nicholas Piggin (8): powerpc: copy_thread remove unused pkey code powerpc: copy_thread make ret_from_fork

Re: [PATCH 0/8] generic command line v4

2022-09-26 Thread Daniel Walker
On Mon, Sep 26, 2022 at 05:52:18PM -0500, Rob Herring wrote: > On Thu, Sep 22, 2022 at 4:15 PM Daniel Gimpelevich > wrote: > > > > On Thu, 2022-09-22 at 14:10 -0700, Daniel Walker wrote: > > > On Thu, Sep 22, 2022 at 05:03:46PM -0400, Sean Anderson wrote: > > [snip] > > > > As recently as last mon

Re: [PATCH 0/8] generic command line v4

2022-09-26 Thread Daniel Walker
On Thu, Sep 22, 2022 at 02:15:44PM -0700, Daniel Gimpelevich wrote: > On Thu, 2022-09-22 at 14:10 -0700, Daniel Walker wrote: > > On Thu, Sep 22, 2022 at 05:03:46PM -0400, Sean Anderson wrote: > [snip] > > > As recently as last month, someone's patch to add such support was > > > rejected for this

Re: [PATCH 0/8] generic command line v4

2022-09-26 Thread Rob Herring
On Thu, Sep 22, 2022 at 4:15 PM Daniel Gimpelevich wrote: > > On Thu, 2022-09-22 at 14:10 -0700, Daniel Walker wrote: > > On Thu, Sep 22, 2022 at 05:03:46PM -0400, Sean Anderson wrote: > [snip] > > > As recently as last month, someone's patch to add such support was > > > rejected for this reason

Re: [PATCH 0/8] generic command line v4

2022-09-22 Thread Daniel Gimpelevich
On Thu, 2022-09-22 at 14:10 -0700, Daniel Walker wrote: > On Thu, Sep 22, 2022 at 05:03:46PM -0400, Sean Anderson wrote: [snip] > > As recently as last month, someone's patch to add such support was > > rejected for this reason [1]. > > > > --Sean > > > > [1] > > https://lore.kernel.org/linux-ar

Re: [PATCH 0/8] generic command line v4

2022-09-22 Thread Daniel Walker
On Thu, Sep 22, 2022 at 05:03:46PM -0400, Sean Anderson wrote: > > > > On 9/22/22 4:53 PM, Daniel Walker wrote: > > On Thu, Sep 22, 2022 at 04:45:01PM -0400, Sean Anderson wrote: > >> > >> > >> > >> For an arm64 platform (after rebasing): > >> > >> Tested-by: Sean Anderson > > > > Maybe I'

Re: [PATCH 0/8] generic command line v4

2022-09-22 Thread Sean Anderson
On 9/22/22 4:53 PM, Daniel Walker wrote: > On Thu, Sep 22, 2022 at 04:45:01PM -0400, Sean Anderson wrote: >> >> >> >> For an arm64 platform (after rebasing): >> >> Tested-by: Sean Anderson > > Maybe I'll re-submit it. > > Daniel > There's still no way to extend the command line on ARM6

Re: [PATCH 0/8] generic command line v4

2022-09-22 Thread Daniel Walker
On Thu, Sep 22, 2022 at 04:45:01PM -0400, Sean Anderson wrote: > > > > For an arm64 platform (after rebasing): > > Tested-by: Sean Anderson Maybe I'll re-submit it. Daniel

Re: [PATCH 0/8] generic command line v4

2022-09-22 Thread Sean Anderson
On 4/16/21 12:09 AM, Daniel Walker wrote: > > v4 release changes > > * Updated insert-sys-cert tool to change command line symbols after > compilation. > > This tool is used to release binary kernels internally to companies > and then later insert certificates for each product b

[PATCH 0/8] sched: Remove unused TASK_SIZE_OF

2021-12-21 Thread guoren
From: Guo Ren This macro isn't used in Linux, now. Delete in include/linux/sched.h and arch's include/asm. This would confuse people who are implementing the COMPAT feature for architecture. Guo Ren (8): sched: Remove unused TASK_SIZE_OF sched: x86: Remove unused TASK_SIZE_OF sched: sparc:

Re: [PATCH 0/8] Convert powerpc to default topdown mmap layout

2021-11-24 Thread Christophe Leroy
Le 24/11/2021 à 14:40, Christophe Leroy a écrit : Le 24/11/2021 à 14:21, Nicholas Piggin a écrit : Excerpts from Christophe Leroy's message of November 22, 2021 6:48 pm: This series converts powerpc to default topdown mmap layout. powerpc provides its own arch_get_unmapped_area() only whe

Re: [PATCH 0/8] Convert powerpc to default topdown mmap layout

2021-11-24 Thread Christophe Leroy
Le 24/11/2021 à 14:21, Nicholas Piggin a écrit : Excerpts from Christophe Leroy's message of November 22, 2021 6:48 pm: This series converts powerpc to default topdown mmap layout. powerpc provides its own arch_get_unmapped_area() only when slices are needed, which is only for book3s/64. Fir

Re: [PATCH 0/8] Convert powerpc to default topdown mmap layout

2021-11-24 Thread Nicholas Piggin
Excerpts from Christophe Leroy's message of November 22, 2021 6:48 pm: > This series converts powerpc to default topdown mmap layout. > > powerpc provides its own arch_get_unmapped_area() only when > slices are needed, which is only for book3s/64. First part of > the series moves slices into book3

[PATCH 0/8] Convert powerpc to default topdown mmap layout

2021-11-22 Thread Christophe Leroy
This series converts powerpc to default topdown mmap layout. powerpc provides its own arch_get_unmapped_area() only when slices are needed, which is only for book3s/64. First part of the series moves slices into book3s/64 specific directories and cleans up other subarchitectures. Then a small mod

[PATCH 0/8] Fix long standing AER Error Handling Issues

2021-10-04 Thread Naveen Naidu
This patch series aims at fixing some of the AER error handling issues we have. Currently we have the following issues: - Confusing message in aer_print_error() - aer_err_info not being initialized completely in DPC path before we print the AER logs - A bug [1] in clearing of AER registers

Re: [RFC PATCH 0/8] Move task_struct::cpu back into thread_info

2021-09-21 Thread Ard Biesheuvel
On Tue, 14 Sept 2021 at 15:55, Mark Rutland wrote: > > On Tue, Sep 14, 2021 at 02:10:28PM +0200, Ard Biesheuvel wrote: > > Commit c65eacbe290b ("sched/core: Allow putting thread_info into > > task_struct") mentions that, along with moving thread_info into > > task_struct, the cpu field is moved ou

Re: [RFC PATCH 0/8] Move task_struct::cpu back into thread_info

2021-09-14 Thread Mark Rutland
On Tue, Sep 14, 2021 at 02:10:28PM +0200, Ard Biesheuvel wrote: > Commit c65eacbe290b ("sched/core: Allow putting thread_info into > task_struct") mentions that, along with moving thread_info into > task_struct, the cpu field is moved out of the former into the latter, > but does not explain why.

Re: [RFC PATCH 0/8] Move task_struct::cpu back into thread_info

2021-09-14 Thread Christophe Leroy
Le 14/09/2021 à 14:10, Ard Biesheuvel a écrit : Commit c65eacbe290b ("sched/core: Allow putting thread_info into task_struct") mentions that, along with moving thread_info into task_struct, the cpu field is moved out of the former into the latter, but does not explain why. I think it does ex

[RFC PATCH 0/8] Move task_struct::cpu back into thread_info

2021-09-14 Thread Ard Biesheuvel
Commit c65eacbe290b ("sched/core: Allow putting thread_info into task_struct") mentions that, along with moving thread_info into task_struct, the cpu field is moved out of the former into the latter, but does not explain why. While collaborating with Keith on adding THREAD_INFO_IN_TASK support to

[PATCH 0/8] powerpc: fast interrupt exit bug and misc fixes

2021-06-28 Thread Nicholas Piggin
This is a bunch of fixes for powerpc next, mostly a nasty hole in fast interrupt exit code found by Sachin and some other bits along the way while looking at it. So far this survives about 5 hours of stress testing with a workload that would trigger it in a few seconds (guest 128 vcpus running ker

Re: [RFC PATCH 0/8] Add support for FORM2 associativity

2021-06-14 Thread Daniel Henrique Barboza
On 6/14/21 1:39 PM, Aneesh Kumar K.V wrote: Form2 associativity adds a much more flexible NUMA topology layout than what is provided by Form1. This also allows PAPR SCM device to use better associativity when using the device as DAX KMEM device. More details can be found in patch x $ ndctl li

[RFC PATCH 0/8] Add support for FORM2 associativity

2021-06-14 Thread Aneesh Kumar K.V
Form2 associativity adds a much more flexible NUMA topology layout than what is provided by Form1. This also allows PAPR SCM device to use better associativity when using the device as DAX KMEM device. More details can be found in patch x $ ndctl list -N -v [ { "dev":"namespace0.0", "mod

Re: [PATCH 0/8] xen: harden frontends against malicious backends

2021-05-21 Thread Marek Marczykowski-Górecki
On Thu, May 13, 2021 at 12:02:54PM +0200, Juergen Gross wrote: > Xen backends of para-virtualized devices can live in dom0 kernel, dom0 > user land, or in a driver domain. This means that a backend might > reside in a less trusted environment than the Xen core components, so > a backend should not

[PATCH 0/8] xen: harden frontends against malicious backends

2021-05-13 Thread Juergen Gross
Xen backends of para-virtualized devices can live in dom0 kernel, dom0 user land, or in a driver domain. This means that a backend might reside in a less trusted environment than the Xen core components, so a backend should not be able to do harm to a Xen guest (it can still mess up I/O data, but i

[PATCH 0/8] generic command line v4

2021-04-15 Thread Daniel Walker
v4 release changes * Updated insert-sys-cert tool to change command line symbols after compilation. This tool is used to release binary kernels internally to companies and then later insert certificates for each product by consumers of the binary kernel. Cisco uses thi

Re: [RFC PATCH 0/8] WIP support for the LLVM integrated assembler

2021-03-14 Thread Michael Ellerman
On Thu, 25 Feb 2021 14:09:58 +1100, Daniel Axtens wrote: > To support Clang's CFI we need LTO. For LTO, we need to be able to compile > with the LLVM integrated assembler. > > Currently, we can't. > > This series gets us a bit closer, but I'm still stuck and I'm hoping > someone can point me in t

[RFC PATCH 0/8] WIP support for the LLVM integrated assembler

2021-02-24 Thread Daniel Axtens
To support Clang's CFI we need LTO. For LTO, we need to be able to compile with the LLVM integrated assembler. Currently, we can't. This series gets us a bit closer, but I'm still stuck and I'm hoping someone can point me in the right direction. Patch 1 is a fix that can be merged at any time.

Re: [PATCH 0/8] powerpc/64s: fix and improve machine check handling

2020-12-10 Thread Michael Ellerman
On Sat, 28 Nov 2020 17:07:20 +1000, Nicholas Piggin wrote: > First patch is a nasty memory scribble introduced by me :( That > should go into fixes. > > The next ones could wait for next merge window. They get things to the > point where misbehaving or buggy guest isn't so painful for the host, >

Re: [PATCH 0/8] powerpc/64s: fix and improve machine check handling

2020-12-04 Thread Michael Ellerman
On Sat, 28 Nov 2020 17:07:20 +1000, Nicholas Piggin wrote: > First patch is a nasty memory scribble introduced by me :( That > should go into fixes. > > The next ones could wait for next merge window. They get things to the > point where misbehaving or buggy guest isn't so painful for the host, >

[PATCH 0/8] shoot lazy tlbs

2020-11-28 Thread Nicholas Piggin
This is a rebase now on top of Arnd's asm-generic tree, which has reduced most of the fluff from this patch series. The x86 refactoring is still in the way a bit, I hope to get some movement on that rather than rebase the main patches off it, because I think it's a good cleanup. I think it could g

[PATCH 0/8] powerpc/64s: fix and improve machine check handling

2020-11-27 Thread Nicholas Piggin
First patch is a nasty memory scribble introduced by me :( That should go into fixes. The next ones could wait for next merge window. They get things to the point where misbehaving or buggy guest isn't so painful for the host, and also get the guest SLB dumping code working (because the host no lo

Re: [PATCH 0/8] Rid W=1 warnings in Net

2020-11-27 Thread Jakub Kicinski
On Thu, 26 Nov 2020 13:38:45 + Lee Jones wrote: > Resending the stragglers. > > This set is part of a larger effort attempting to clean-up W=1 > kernel builds, which are currently overwhelmingly riddled with > niggly little warnings. This set doesn't apply to net-next, please rebase.

[PATCH 0/8] Rid W=1 warnings in Net

2020-11-26 Thread Lee Jones
Resending the stragglers. This set is part of a larger effort attempting to clean-up W=1 kernel builds, which are currently overwhelmingly riddled with niggly little warnings. Lee Jones (8): net: ethernet: smsc: smc91x: Demote non-conformant kernel function header net: xen-netback: xenbus

[PATCH 0/8] Improve signal performance on PPC64 with KUAP

2020-10-15 Thread Christopher M. Riedl
As reported by Anton, there is a large penalty to signal handling performance on radix systems using KUAP. The signal handling code performs many user access operations, each of which needs to switch the KUAP permissions bit to open and then close user access. This involves a costly 'mtspr' operati

Re: [PATCH 0/8] scsi: convert tasklets to use new tasklet_setup()

2020-09-01 Thread Allen
> > > > > > > > Commit 12cc923f1ccc ("tasklet: Introduce new initialization > > > > API")' introduced a new tasklet initialization API. This series > > > > converts all the scsi drivers to use the new tasklet_setup() API > > > > > > I've got to say I agree with Jens, this was a silly obfuscation: >

Re: [PATCH 0/8] scsi: convert tasklets to use new tasklet_setup()

2020-08-17 Thread James Bottomley
On Mon, 2020-08-17 at 12:28 -0700, Kees Cook wrote: > On Mon, Aug 17, 2020 at 07:41:58AM -0700, James Bottomley wrote: > > On Mon, 2020-08-17 at 14:24 +0530, Allen Pais wrote: > > > From: Allen Pais > > > > > > Commit 12cc923f1ccc ("tasklet: Introduce new initialization > > > API")' introduced a

Re: [PATCH 0/8] scsi: convert tasklets to use new tasklet_setup()

2020-08-17 Thread James Bottomley
On Mon, 2020-08-17 at 14:24 +0530, Allen Pais wrote: > From: Allen Pais > > Commit 12cc923f1ccc ("tasklet: Introduce new initialization API")' > introduced a new tasklet initialization API. This series converts > all the scsi drivers to use the new tasklet_setup() API I've got to say I agree wi

Re: [PATCH 0/8] scsi: convert tasklets to use new tasklet_setup()

2020-08-17 Thread Kees Cook
On Mon, Aug 17, 2020 at 07:41:58AM -0700, James Bottomley wrote: > On Mon, 2020-08-17 at 14:24 +0530, Allen Pais wrote: > > From: Allen Pais > > > > Commit 12cc923f1ccc ("tasklet: Introduce new initialization API")' > > introduced a new tasklet initialization API. This series converts > > all th

[PATCH 0/8] scsi: convert tasklets to use new tasklet_setup()

2020-08-17 Thread Allen Pais
From: Allen Pais Commit 12cc923f1ccc ("tasklet: Introduce new initialization API")' introduced a new tasklet initialization API. This series converts all the scsi drivers to use the new tasklet_setup() API Allen Pais (8): scsi: aic94xx: convert tasklets to use new tasklet_setup() API scsi:

Re: [PATCH 0/8] Mac ADB IOP driver fixes

2020-07-27 Thread Michael Ellerman
On Sun, 31 May 2020 09:17:03 +1000, Finn Thain wrote: > The adb-iop driver was never finished. Some deficiencies have become > apparent over the years. For example, > > - Mouse and/or keyboard may stop working if used together > > - SRQ autopoll list cannot be changed > > [...] Applied to pow

Re: [PATCH 0/8] mm: cleanup usage of

2020-07-02 Thread Mike Rapoport
Gentle ping. On Sat, Jun 27, 2020 at 05:34:45PM +0300, Mike Rapoport wrote: > From: Mike Rapoport > > Hi, > > Most architectures have very similar versions of pXd_alloc_one() and > pXd_free_one() for intermediate levels of page table. > These patches add generic versions of these functions in

[PATCH 0/8] powerpc: queued spinlocks and rwlocks

2020-07-02 Thread Nicholas Piggin
This series adds an option to use queued spinlocks for powerpc, and makes it the default for the Book3S-64 subarch. This effort starts with the generic code so it's very simple but still very performant. There are optimisations that can be made to slowpaths, but I think it's better to attack those

Re: [PATCH 0/8 v2] PCI: Align return values of PCIe capability and PCI accessors

2020-06-30 Thread Jason Gunthorpe
On Mon, Jun 15, 2020 at 09:32:17AM +0200, refactormys...@gmail.com wrote: > Bolarinwa Olayemi Saheed (8): > IB/hfi1: Convert PCIBIOS_* errors to generic -E* errors > IB/hfi1: Convert PCIBIOS_* errors to generic -E* errors Applied to rdma for-next thanks Jason

Re: [PATCH 0/8] mm: cleanup usage of

2020-06-29 Thread Pekka Enberg
On Sat, Jun 27, 2020 at 5:35 PM Mike Rapoport wrote: > Most architectures have very similar versions of pXd_alloc_one() and > pXd_free_one() for intermediate levels of page table. > These patches add generic versions of these functions in > and enable use of the generic functions where > appropri

Re: [PATCH 0/8] mm: cleanup usage of

2020-06-27 Thread Matthew Wilcox
On Sat, Jun 27, 2020 at 05:34:45PM +0300, Mike Rapoport wrote: > Most architectures have very similar versions of pXd_alloc_one() and > pXd_free_one() for intermediate levels of page table. > These patches add generic versions of these functions in > and enable use of the generic functions where

  1   2   3   4   5   >