Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH v3 1/5] acpi, nfit: Switch to use new generic UUID API

2017-06-07 Thread h...@lst.de
On Wed, Jun 07, 2017 at 12:37:51PM +0300, Andy Shevchenko wrote: > It think we may fold it. Yes, I'll fold it and delcare the tree stable late tonight my time. > Besides that we might need the following fix as well. Yeah. Another reasone why buffer.pointer should be a void pointer.

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH v3 1/5] acpi, nfit: Switch to use new generic UUID API

2017-06-07 Thread h...@lst.de
On Wed, Jun 07, 2017 at 06:25:46AM +, Williams, Dan J wrote: > With one compile fix below the 'acpi' branch works for me. Please feel > free to add: The mail seems to contain garbage that can't be applied, but I just applied the changes manually. ___

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 1/3] i915/gvt: seperate tracked MMIO table from handlers.c

2021-11-09 Thread h...@lst.de
On Tue, Nov 09, 2021 at 12:20:24PM +0200, Jani Nikula wrote: > Having the functions defined in a single .c file and called (perhaps via > just one or two entry points) sounds much better than including code. > > Perhaps you could pass in the function to call (new_mmio_info) as a > parameter in dif

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 1/3] i915/gvt: seperate tracked MMIO table from handlers.c

2021-11-09 Thread h...@lst.de
On Tue, Nov 09, 2021 at 10:51:27AM +, Wang, Zhi A wrote: > Can you elaborate more about this? We need the hash query from the table > ASAP when the hypervisor trapped a mmio access. It's a critical path and > we tried different data structure in the kernel and the hash table gives > the best

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/i915: Fix a possible use of uninitialized variable in remap_io_sg()

2021-05-17 Thread h...@lst.de
On Sat, May 15, 2021 at 12:23:04AM +, Souza, Jose wrote: > On Fri, 2021-05-14 at 07:49 +0200, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > > On Thu, May 13, 2021 at 04:28:41PM -0700, José Roberto de Souza wrote: > > > If the do while loop breaks in 'if (!sg_dma_len(sgl))' in the first > > > iteration, err is uni

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH v5] drm/i915: stop using swiotlb

2022-08-09 Thread h...@lst.de
On Mon, Aug 08, 2022 at 03:48:02PM +, Hellstrom, Thomas wrote: > This whole thing looks a bit strange to me since with SWIOTLB actually > used for i915, the driver should malfunction anyway as it doesn't do > any dma_sync_sg_for_cpu() or dma_sync_sg_for_device(), Yeah, I can't actually see any

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH v5] drm/i915: stop using swiotlb

2022-08-09 Thread h...@lst.de
On Tue, Aug 09, 2022 at 12:36:50PM +0100, Tvrtko Ursulin wrote: > > Digging through git history at least running as Xen dom0 looks to have been > impacted, but commits such as abb0deacb5a6 ("drm/i915: Fallback to single > PAGE_SIZE segments for DMA remapping") are older and suggest problem was >