Re: [ANNOUNCE] iommu-2.6.git tree
From: David Woodhouse
Date: Sun Oct 19 2008 - 13:43:20 EST
On Sun, 2008-10-19 at 19:26 +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> * David Woodhouse <dwmw2@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > On Sun, 2008-10-19 at 14:47 +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> > > * David Woodhouse <dwmw2@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > >
> > > > On Sun, 2008-10-19 at 13:12 +0200, Joerg Roedel wrote:
> > > > > On Sat, Oct 18, 2008 at 04:30:43PM +0100, David Woodhouse wrote:
> > > > > > As previously threatened, I've created an iommu-2.6.git tree:
> > > > > > git://git.infradead.org/iommu-2.6.git
> > > > > > http://git.infradead.org/iommu-2.6.git
> > > > >
> > > > > Is there a specific reason why IOMMU stuff should go to Linus
> > > > > without testing them in the x86 tree before? The DMA layer and IOMMU
> > > > > drivers are an integral component of the architecture and patches
> > > > > for it are best placed in the architecture tree instead of a
> > > > > seperate one, imho.
> > > >
> > > > This is the purpose that linux-next serves, not the x86
> > > > forest-of-doom.
> > > >
> > > > And I thought Ingo said his old iommu tree wasn't in there anyway?
> > > > [...]
> > >
> > > That's weird, where did you get the impression from that i "dropped" the
> > > "old" IOMMU tree? It's alive and kicking, all the new IOMMU code that we
> > > queued up and tested in the last cycle for v2.6.28 have just gone
> > > upstream - about 80 commits.
> > I cannot find the tree which allegedly already exists [...]
> it's tip/auto-iommu-next.
I have no idea what that means.
I tried 'locate auto-iommu-next' on master.kernel.org, but that doesn't
seem to find anything -- is it elsewhere?
Can you give a proper URL for a git tree, with a description explaining
its nature, and everything that one would normally expect from a git
> > [...] -- and unless I'm mistaken, a number of patches seem to have
> > fallen through the cracks in the last few weeks. Since I've been asked
> > to start looking after the Intel IOMMU parts, it seemed sensible to
> > make a git tree and round up those patches.
> hm, no patches have been lost that i'm aware of - the last ~10 days of
> inbox is not queued up yet because of the merge window - but those
> (except for urgent fixes) are v2.6.29 items anyway.
There were patches outstanding which depended on both the interrupt
remapping and the KVM work. And which add IA64 support for VT-d.
> > I thought you and Thomas were working together, and I spoke to Thomas
> > about it during the Kernel Summit. Unless I'm very much mistaken, he
> > agreed that it makes sense to have a separate, real, git tree for
> > cross-platform IOMMU-related work.
> > If you want to pull that tree into yours, that's fine by me -- as long
> > as it gets into linux-next.
> okay, we can certainly do that. And if/when all future activities center
> around your tree, and there's no interaction with x86 platform bits, it
> will be natural for you to just not go over any middlemen.
> But i'd prefer to at least have some transitionary period - IOMMU
> changes are not easy topics and they caused subtle breakages a couple of
> times and it was quite handy that those breakages were generally seen by
> all x86 developers (and immediately fixed afterwards). 99% of the
> current iommu development activities are in the x86 space, so there's
> quite some alignment there.
Again, isn't this what linux-next is for? But if you want to pull it
into your own linux-next-but-only-for-x86 tree, then that's fine too; as
David Woodhouse Open Source Technology Centre
David.Woodhouse@xxxxxxxxx Intel Corporation
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/