On Tue, Sep 13, 2016 at 08:37:27PM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> I can be passive-aggressive too, so:
>
> NAKed-by: Ingo Molnar
>
> If the ugliness that makes the patch much harder to review than it should be
> is
How about not beeing a dick? If you ask _nicely_ to respin
On Tue, Sep 13, 2016 at 08:37:27PM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> I can be passive-aggressive too, so:
>
> NAKed-by: Ingo Molnar
>
> If the ugliness that makes the patch much harder to review than it should be
> is
How about not beeing a dick? If you ask _nicely_ to respin it anyway
I'd be
* Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 12, 2016 at 01:45:40PM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> > Please organize such initializers better! Something like this:
>
> > Makes it much easier to review such definitions.
>
> That's my personal preference, too. But this is just
* Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 12, 2016 at 01:45:40PM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> > Please organize such initializers better! Something like this:
>
> > Makes it much easier to review such definitions.
>
> That's my personal preference, too. But this is just moving/consolidating
>
On Sun, 11 Sep 2016, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> x86 wasn't wiring up ->set_dma_mask before, but it's the same as the
> default so we are fine. (arm can't remove it just yet, but eventually
> we'll get there).
>
> Signed-off-by: Christoph Hellwig
Acked-by: Stefano Stabellini
On Sun, 11 Sep 2016, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> x86 wasn't wiring up ->set_dma_mask before, but it's the same as the
> default so we are fine. (arm can't remove it just yet, but eventually
> we'll get there).
>
> Signed-off-by: Christoph Hellwig
Acked-by: Stefano Stabellini
>
On Sun, Sep 11, 2016 at 06:35:08PM +0200, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> x86 wasn't wiring up ->set_dma_mask before, but it's the same as the
> default so we are fine. (arm can't remove it just yet, but eventually
> we'll get there).
>
Acked-by: Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk
On Sun, Sep 11, 2016 at 06:35:08PM +0200, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> x86 wasn't wiring up ->set_dma_mask before, but it's the same as the
> default so we are fine. (arm can't remove it just yet, but eventually
> we'll get there).
>
Acked-by: Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk
On Mon, Sep 12, 2016 at 01:45:40PM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> Please organize such initializers better! Something like this:
> Makes it much easier to review such definitions.
That's my personal preference, too. But this is just moving/consolidating
code, so I don't plan to do fancy moves.
On Mon, Sep 12, 2016 at 01:45:40PM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> Please organize such initializers better! Something like this:
> Makes it much easier to review such definitions.
That's my personal preference, too. But this is just moving/consolidating
code, so I don't plan to do fancy moves.
* Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> +struct dma_map_ops xen_swiotlb_dma_ops = {
> + .mapping_error = xen_swiotlb_dma_mapping_error,
> + .alloc = xen_swiotlb_alloc_coherent,
> + .free = xen_swiotlb_free_coherent,
> + .sync_single_for_cpu = xen_swiotlb_sync_single_for_cpu,
>
* Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> +struct dma_map_ops xen_swiotlb_dma_ops = {
> + .mapping_error = xen_swiotlb_dma_mapping_error,
> + .alloc = xen_swiotlb_alloc_coherent,
> + .free = xen_swiotlb_free_coherent,
> + .sync_single_for_cpu = xen_swiotlb_sync_single_for_cpu,
> +
x86 wasn't wiring up ->set_dma_mask before, but it's the same as the
default so we are fine. (arm can't remove it just yet, but eventually
we'll get there).
Signed-off-by: Christoph Hellwig
---
arch/arm/xen/mm.c | 16 ---
arch/x86/xen/pci-swiotlb-xen.c | 15
x86 wasn't wiring up ->set_dma_mask before, but it's the same as the
default so we are fine. (arm can't remove it just yet, but eventually
we'll get there).
Signed-off-by: Christoph Hellwig
---
arch/arm/xen/mm.c | 16 ---
arch/x86/xen/pci-swiotlb-xen.c | 15 --
14 matches
Mail list logo