[PATCH -v2 0/7] powerpc: use asm-generic/dma-mapping-common.h
benh at kernel.crashing.org
Thu Aug 13 18:09:41 EST 2009
> Ben, what's your preference? I waited for your reaction with these
> bits, i.e. they are not in tip:core/iommu yet.
Oh I though they were... discard my previous private mail about
missing Ack's then :-)
I'll review them more in depth hopefully tomorrow but they look good.
> One variant would be what Fujita suggested: you could pull
> core/iommu as a basis (it's a well-tested, problem-free tree at the
> moment, with no big risky items), and then pull/apply the powerpc
> specific bits from Fujita.
Or we can have the patches in core/iommu and I pull the whole thing
in powerpc-next. My main concern isn't which tree they go through but
that they are in powerpc-next for better testing.
> A second variant would be that we could pull these bits into
> core/iommu ... albeit you are right that the PowerPC tree is much
> better at testing PowerPC patches.
> A third variant would be to wait with these bits until the swiotlb
> bits in core/iommu hit upstream. This would increase patch latency.
> Any of these variants is good to me. What Fujita suggests seems to
> be the best to me: #1 gets us the most testing and the lowest
> latency - at the cost of tree dependency. We wont rebase core/iommu.
> [ We've got three good tree properties: "tree independence",
> "good testing", "low patch latency", but we cannot have all
> three at once, we must pick two of them ;-) ]
More information about the Linuxppc-dev