> From: Baolu Lu <baolu...@linux.intel.com> > Sent: Tuesday, June 14, 2022 2:13 PM > > On 2022/6/14 13:36, Tian, Kevin wrote: > >> From: Baolu Lu<baolu...@linux.intel.com> > >> Sent: Tuesday, June 14, 2022 12:48 PM > >> > >> On 2022/6/14 12:02, Tian, Kevin wrote: > >>>> From: Lu Baolu<baolu...@linux.intel.com> > >>>> Sent: Tuesday, June 14, 2022 11:44 AM > >>>> > >>>> This allows the upper layers to set a domain to a PASID of a device > >>>> if the PASID feature is supported by the IOMMU hardware. The typical > >>>> use cases are, for example, kernel DMA with PASID and hardware > >>>> assisted mediated device drivers. > >>>> > >>> why is it not part of the series for those use cases? There is no consumer > >>> of added callbacks in this patch... > >> It could be. I just wanted to maintain the integrity of Intel IOMMU > >> driver implementation. > > but let's not add dead code. and this patch is actually a right step > > simply from set_dev_pasid() p.o.v hence you should include in any > > series which first tries to use that interface. > > > > Yes, that's my intention. If it reviews well, we can include it in the > driver's implementation. >
Then you should make it clear in the first place. otherwise a patch like this implies a review for merge. 😊 _______________________________________________ iommu mailing list iommu@lists.linux-foundation.org https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/iommu