On Fri, 20 Aug 2021 at 10:04, Li, Chunming <chunming...@verisilicon.com> wrote: > > > On Fri, 20 Aug 2021 at 03:36, Li, Chunming > > <chunming...@verisilicon.com> wrote: > > > > > > The current SMMU V3 device model only support PCI/PCIe devices, > > > so we update it to support non-PCI/PCIe devices. > > > > > > hw/arm/smmuv3: > > > . Create IOMMU memory regions for non-PCI/PCIe devices based > > on their SID > > > . Add sid-map property to store non-PCI/PCIe devices SID > > > . Update implementation of CFGI commands based on device SID > > > hw/arm/smmu-common: > > > . Differentiate PCI/PCIe and non-PCI/PCIe devices SID getting > > strategy > > > hw/arm/virt: > > > . Add PL330 DMA controller and connect with SMMUv3 for > > testing > > > . Add smmuv3_sidmap for non-PCI/PCIe devices SID setting > > > > Please don't try to do all these things in one big patch -- > > put together a patchseries with several smaller patches, > > each of which does one self-contained thing. > > > Got it. Thanks for your comments. > Let me try to split them into several smaller patches. > But all these updates work for 1 thing. They are depend on each other.
Yes, that's why you send a single patch *series*, which has a cover letter that explains the overall purpose. Then each individual patch in the series has a commit message that describes what that specific patch is doing. As emails, the patches are all sent as follow-ups to the coverletter. "git format-patch" and "git send-email" should handle this for you. https://wiki.qemu.org/Contribute/SubmitAPatch#Split_up_long_patches has a little more discussion of this. > > If you have a patch that depends on another, it's usually better to > > send them as a patchseries. I was wondering what the reason for > > that PL330 patch was... > I need a non-PCI/PCIe device to do the verification. The old PL330 DMA > controller > cannot configure its memory region manually. So we update it and provide > path. > PL330 patch was reviewed and will be merged in target-arm.next for 6.2. > The virt.c compile will fail if there is no PL330 device patch. Yeah, I accepted it because it is a sensible cleanup on its own; but it would have been a bit easier for me to understand why you were doing that if I'd had the wider context. thanks -- PMM
