All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>
To: Jean-Philippe Brucker <jean-philippe@linaro.org>, robin.murphy@arm.com
Cc: mark.rutland@arm.com, devicetree@vger.kernel.org,
	lorenzo.pieralisi@arm.com, eric.auger@redhat.com,
	linux-pci@vger.kernel.org, joro@8bytes.org, sudeep.holla@arm.com,
	rjw@rjwysocki.net, linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org,
	iommu@lists.linux-foundation.org, robh+dt@kernel.org,
	jonathan.cameron@huawei.com, guohanjun@huawei.com,
	bhelgaas@google.com, zhangfei.gao@linaro.org,
	linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, lenb@kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 11/13] iommu/arm-smmu-v3: Improve add_device() error handling
Date: Wed, 15 Jan 2020 16:17:15 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20200115161714.GA30746@willie-the-truck> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20200114152538.GB2579@willie-the-truck>

On Tue, Jan 14, 2020 at 03:25:39PM +0000, Will Deacon wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 19, 2019 at 05:30:31PM +0100, Jean-Philippe Brucker wrote:
> > Let add_device() clean up after itself. The iommu_bus_init() function
> > does call remove_device() on error, but other sites (e.g. of_iommu) do
> > not.
> > 
> > Don't free level-2 stream tables because we'd have to track if we
> > allocated each of them or if they are used by other endpoints. It's not
> > worth the hassle since they are managed resources.
> > 
> > Reviewed-by: Eric Auger <eric.auger@redhat.com>
> > Reviewed-by: Jonathan Cameron <Jonathan.Cameron@huawei.com>
> > Signed-off-by: Jean-Philippe Brucker <jean-philippe@linaro.org>
> > ---
> >  drivers/iommu/arm-smmu-v3.c | 28 +++++++++++++++++++++-------
> >  1 file changed, 21 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
> 
> I think this is alright, with one caveat relating to:
> 
> 
> 	/*
> 	 * We _can_ actually withstand dodgy bus code re-calling add_device()
> 	 * without an intervening remove_device()/of_xlate() sequence, but
> 	 * we're not going to do so quietly...
> 	 */
> 	if (WARN_ON_ONCE(fwspec->iommu_priv)) {
> 		master = fwspec->iommu_priv;
> 		smmu = master->smmu;
> 	} ...
> 
> 
> which may be on shakey ground if the subsequent add_device() call can fail
> and free stuff that the first one allocated. At least, I don't know what
> we're trying to support with this, so it's hard to tell whether or not it
> still works as intended after your change.
> 
> How is this supposed to work? I don't recall ever seeing that WARN fire,
> so can we just remove this and bail instead? Robin?
> 
> Something like below before your changes...

FWIW, I've written this as a patch locally, since I'd like to apply it
on top of v5 of your series.

Will

--->8

From 6029102f406d4db5e7a465da5fd2e08a5b12c532 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>
Date: Wed, 15 Jan 2020 15:35:16 +0000
Subject: [PATCH] iommu/arm-smmu-v3: Return -EBUSY when trying to re-add a
 device

Although we WARN in arm_smmu_add_device() if the device being added has
been added already without a subsequent call to arm_smmu_remove_device(),
we still continue half-heartedly, initialising the stream-table for any
new StreamIDs that may have magically appeared and re-establishing device
links that should still be there from last time.

Given that calling ->add_device() twice without removing the device in the
meantime is indicative of an error in the caller, just return -EBUSY after
warning.

Cc: Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@arm.com>
Cc: Jean Philippe-Brucker <jean-philippe@linaro.org>
Signed-off-by: Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>
---
 drivers/iommu/arm-smmu-v3.c | 37 ++++++++++++++++---------------------
 1 file changed, 16 insertions(+), 21 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/iommu/arm-smmu-v3.c b/drivers/iommu/arm-smmu-v3.c
index efa326601308..cc26e1323da3 100644
--- a/drivers/iommu/arm-smmu-v3.c
+++ b/drivers/iommu/arm-smmu-v3.c
@@ -2841,28 +2841,23 @@ static int arm_smmu_add_device(struct device *dev)
 
 	if (!fwspec || fwspec->ops != &arm_smmu_ops)
 		return -ENODEV;
-	/*
-	 * We _can_ actually withstand dodgy bus code re-calling add_device()
-	 * without an intervening remove_device()/of_xlate() sequence, but
-	 * we're not going to do so quietly...
-	 */
-	if (WARN_ON_ONCE(fwspec->iommu_priv)) {
-		master = fwspec->iommu_priv;
-		smmu = master->smmu;
-	} else {
-		smmu = arm_smmu_get_by_fwnode(fwspec->iommu_fwnode);
-		if (!smmu)
-			return -ENODEV;
-		master = kzalloc(sizeof(*master), GFP_KERNEL);
-		if (!master)
-			return -ENOMEM;
 
-		master->dev = dev;
-		master->smmu = smmu;
-		master->sids = fwspec->ids;
-		master->num_sids = fwspec->num_ids;
-		fwspec->iommu_priv = master;
-	}
+	if (WARN_ON_ONCE(fwspec->iommu_priv))
+		return -EBUSY;
+
+	smmu = arm_smmu_get_by_fwnode(fwspec->iommu_fwnode);
+	if (!smmu)
+		return -ENODEV;
+
+	master = kzalloc(sizeof(*master), GFP_KERNEL);
+	if (!master)
+		return -ENOMEM;
+
+	master->dev = dev;
+	master->smmu = smmu;
+	master->sids = fwspec->ids;
+	master->num_sids = fwspec->num_ids;
+	fwspec->iommu_priv = master;
 
 	/* Check the SIDs are in range of the SMMU and our stream table */
 	for (i = 0; i < master->num_sids; i++) {
-- 
2.25.0.rc1.283.g88dfdc4193-goog


WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>
To: Jean-Philippe Brucker <jean-philippe@linaro.org>, robin.murphy@arm.com
Cc: mark.rutland@arm.com, devicetree@vger.kernel.org,
	guohanjun@huawei.com, linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-pci@vger.kernel.org, rjw@rjwysocki.net,
	iommu@lists.linux-foundation.org, robh+dt@kernel.org,
	sudeep.holla@arm.com, bhelgaas@google.com,
	zhangfei.gao@linaro.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
	lenb@kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 11/13] iommu/arm-smmu-v3: Improve add_device() error handling
Date: Wed, 15 Jan 2020 16:17:15 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20200115161714.GA30746@willie-the-truck> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20200114152538.GB2579@willie-the-truck>

On Tue, Jan 14, 2020 at 03:25:39PM +0000, Will Deacon wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 19, 2019 at 05:30:31PM +0100, Jean-Philippe Brucker wrote:
> > Let add_device() clean up after itself. The iommu_bus_init() function
> > does call remove_device() on error, but other sites (e.g. of_iommu) do
> > not.
> > 
> > Don't free level-2 stream tables because we'd have to track if we
> > allocated each of them or if they are used by other endpoints. It's not
> > worth the hassle since they are managed resources.
> > 
> > Reviewed-by: Eric Auger <eric.auger@redhat.com>
> > Reviewed-by: Jonathan Cameron <Jonathan.Cameron@huawei.com>
> > Signed-off-by: Jean-Philippe Brucker <jean-philippe@linaro.org>
> > ---
> >  drivers/iommu/arm-smmu-v3.c | 28 +++++++++++++++++++++-------
> >  1 file changed, 21 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
> 
> I think this is alright, with one caveat relating to:
> 
> 
> 	/*
> 	 * We _can_ actually withstand dodgy bus code re-calling add_device()
> 	 * without an intervening remove_device()/of_xlate() sequence, but
> 	 * we're not going to do so quietly...
> 	 */
> 	if (WARN_ON_ONCE(fwspec->iommu_priv)) {
> 		master = fwspec->iommu_priv;
> 		smmu = master->smmu;
> 	} ...
> 
> 
> which may be on shakey ground if the subsequent add_device() call can fail
> and free stuff that the first one allocated. At least, I don't know what
> we're trying to support with this, so it's hard to tell whether or not it
> still works as intended after your change.
> 
> How is this supposed to work? I don't recall ever seeing that WARN fire,
> so can we just remove this and bail instead? Robin?
> 
> Something like below before your changes...

FWIW, I've written this as a patch locally, since I'd like to apply it
on top of v5 of your series.

Will

--->8

From 6029102f406d4db5e7a465da5fd2e08a5b12c532 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>
Date: Wed, 15 Jan 2020 15:35:16 +0000
Subject: [PATCH] iommu/arm-smmu-v3: Return -EBUSY when trying to re-add a
 device

Although we WARN in arm_smmu_add_device() if the device being added has
been added already without a subsequent call to arm_smmu_remove_device(),
we still continue half-heartedly, initialising the stream-table for any
new StreamIDs that may have magically appeared and re-establishing device
links that should still be there from last time.

Given that calling ->add_device() twice without removing the device in the
meantime is indicative of an error in the caller, just return -EBUSY after
warning.

Cc: Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@arm.com>
Cc: Jean Philippe-Brucker <jean-philippe@linaro.org>
Signed-off-by: Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>
---
 drivers/iommu/arm-smmu-v3.c | 37 ++++++++++++++++---------------------
 1 file changed, 16 insertions(+), 21 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/iommu/arm-smmu-v3.c b/drivers/iommu/arm-smmu-v3.c
index efa326601308..cc26e1323da3 100644
--- a/drivers/iommu/arm-smmu-v3.c
+++ b/drivers/iommu/arm-smmu-v3.c
@@ -2841,28 +2841,23 @@ static int arm_smmu_add_device(struct device *dev)
 
 	if (!fwspec || fwspec->ops != &arm_smmu_ops)
 		return -ENODEV;
-	/*
-	 * We _can_ actually withstand dodgy bus code re-calling add_device()
-	 * without an intervening remove_device()/of_xlate() sequence, but
-	 * we're not going to do so quietly...
-	 */
-	if (WARN_ON_ONCE(fwspec->iommu_priv)) {
-		master = fwspec->iommu_priv;
-		smmu = master->smmu;
-	} else {
-		smmu = arm_smmu_get_by_fwnode(fwspec->iommu_fwnode);
-		if (!smmu)
-			return -ENODEV;
-		master = kzalloc(sizeof(*master), GFP_KERNEL);
-		if (!master)
-			return -ENOMEM;
 
-		master->dev = dev;
-		master->smmu = smmu;
-		master->sids = fwspec->ids;
-		master->num_sids = fwspec->num_ids;
-		fwspec->iommu_priv = master;
-	}
+	if (WARN_ON_ONCE(fwspec->iommu_priv))
+		return -EBUSY;
+
+	smmu = arm_smmu_get_by_fwnode(fwspec->iommu_fwnode);
+	if (!smmu)
+		return -ENODEV;
+
+	master = kzalloc(sizeof(*master), GFP_KERNEL);
+	if (!master)
+		return -ENOMEM;
+
+	master->dev = dev;
+	master->smmu = smmu;
+	master->sids = fwspec->ids;
+	master->num_sids = fwspec->num_ids;
+	fwspec->iommu_priv = master;
 
 	/* Check the SIDs are in range of the SMMU and our stream table */
 	for (i = 0; i < master->num_sids; i++) {
-- 
2.25.0.rc1.283.g88dfdc4193-goog

_______________________________________________
iommu mailing list
iommu@lists.linux-foundation.org
https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/iommu

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>
To: Jean-Philippe Brucker <jean-philippe@linaro.org>, robin.murphy@arm.com
Cc: mark.rutland@arm.com, devicetree@vger.kernel.org,
	guohanjun@huawei.com, lorenzo.pieralisi@arm.com,
	linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org, linux-pci@vger.kernel.org,
	joro@8bytes.org, jonathan.cameron@huawei.com, rjw@rjwysocki.net,
	eric.auger@redhat.com, iommu@lists.linux-foundation.org,
	robh+dt@kernel.org, sudeep.holla@arm.com, bhelgaas@google.com,
	zhangfei.gao@linaro.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
	lenb@kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 11/13] iommu/arm-smmu-v3: Improve add_device() error handling
Date: Wed, 15 Jan 2020 16:17:15 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20200115161714.GA30746@willie-the-truck> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20200114152538.GB2579@willie-the-truck>

On Tue, Jan 14, 2020 at 03:25:39PM +0000, Will Deacon wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 19, 2019 at 05:30:31PM +0100, Jean-Philippe Brucker wrote:
> > Let add_device() clean up after itself. The iommu_bus_init() function
> > does call remove_device() on error, but other sites (e.g. of_iommu) do
> > not.
> > 
> > Don't free level-2 stream tables because we'd have to track if we
> > allocated each of them or if they are used by other endpoints. It's not
> > worth the hassle since they are managed resources.
> > 
> > Reviewed-by: Eric Auger <eric.auger@redhat.com>
> > Reviewed-by: Jonathan Cameron <Jonathan.Cameron@huawei.com>
> > Signed-off-by: Jean-Philippe Brucker <jean-philippe@linaro.org>
> > ---
> >  drivers/iommu/arm-smmu-v3.c | 28 +++++++++++++++++++++-------
> >  1 file changed, 21 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
> 
> I think this is alright, with one caveat relating to:
> 
> 
> 	/*
> 	 * We _can_ actually withstand dodgy bus code re-calling add_device()
> 	 * without an intervening remove_device()/of_xlate() sequence, but
> 	 * we're not going to do so quietly...
> 	 */
> 	if (WARN_ON_ONCE(fwspec->iommu_priv)) {
> 		master = fwspec->iommu_priv;
> 		smmu = master->smmu;
> 	} ...
> 
> 
> which may be on shakey ground if the subsequent add_device() call can fail
> and free stuff that the first one allocated. At least, I don't know what
> we're trying to support with this, so it's hard to tell whether or not it
> still works as intended after your change.
> 
> How is this supposed to work? I don't recall ever seeing that WARN fire,
> so can we just remove this and bail instead? Robin?
> 
> Something like below before your changes...

FWIW, I've written this as a patch locally, since I'd like to apply it
on top of v5 of your series.

Will

--->8

From 6029102f406d4db5e7a465da5fd2e08a5b12c532 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>
Date: Wed, 15 Jan 2020 15:35:16 +0000
Subject: [PATCH] iommu/arm-smmu-v3: Return -EBUSY when trying to re-add a
 device

Although we WARN in arm_smmu_add_device() if the device being added has
been added already without a subsequent call to arm_smmu_remove_device(),
we still continue half-heartedly, initialising the stream-table for any
new StreamIDs that may have magically appeared and re-establishing device
links that should still be there from last time.

Given that calling ->add_device() twice without removing the device in the
meantime is indicative of an error in the caller, just return -EBUSY after
warning.

Cc: Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@arm.com>
Cc: Jean Philippe-Brucker <jean-philippe@linaro.org>
Signed-off-by: Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>
---
 drivers/iommu/arm-smmu-v3.c | 37 ++++++++++++++++---------------------
 1 file changed, 16 insertions(+), 21 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/iommu/arm-smmu-v3.c b/drivers/iommu/arm-smmu-v3.c
index efa326601308..cc26e1323da3 100644
--- a/drivers/iommu/arm-smmu-v3.c
+++ b/drivers/iommu/arm-smmu-v3.c
@@ -2841,28 +2841,23 @@ static int arm_smmu_add_device(struct device *dev)
 
 	if (!fwspec || fwspec->ops != &arm_smmu_ops)
 		return -ENODEV;
-	/*
-	 * We _can_ actually withstand dodgy bus code re-calling add_device()
-	 * without an intervening remove_device()/of_xlate() sequence, but
-	 * we're not going to do so quietly...
-	 */
-	if (WARN_ON_ONCE(fwspec->iommu_priv)) {
-		master = fwspec->iommu_priv;
-		smmu = master->smmu;
-	} else {
-		smmu = arm_smmu_get_by_fwnode(fwspec->iommu_fwnode);
-		if (!smmu)
-			return -ENODEV;
-		master = kzalloc(sizeof(*master), GFP_KERNEL);
-		if (!master)
-			return -ENOMEM;
 
-		master->dev = dev;
-		master->smmu = smmu;
-		master->sids = fwspec->ids;
-		master->num_sids = fwspec->num_ids;
-		fwspec->iommu_priv = master;
-	}
+	if (WARN_ON_ONCE(fwspec->iommu_priv))
+		return -EBUSY;
+
+	smmu = arm_smmu_get_by_fwnode(fwspec->iommu_fwnode);
+	if (!smmu)
+		return -ENODEV;
+
+	master = kzalloc(sizeof(*master), GFP_KERNEL);
+	if (!master)
+		return -ENOMEM;
+
+	master->dev = dev;
+	master->smmu = smmu;
+	master->sids = fwspec->ids;
+	master->num_sids = fwspec->num_ids;
+	fwspec->iommu_priv = master;
 
 	/* Check the SIDs are in range of the SMMU and our stream table */
 	for (i = 0; i < master->num_sids; i++) {
-- 
2.25.0.rc1.283.g88dfdc4193-goog


_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel

  reply	other threads:[~2020-01-15 16:17 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 102+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2019-12-19 16:30 [PATCH v4 00/13] iommu: Add PASID support to Arm SMMUv3 Jean-Philippe Brucker
2019-12-19 16:30 ` Jean-Philippe Brucker
2019-12-19 16:30 ` Jean-Philippe Brucker
2019-12-19 16:30 ` [PATCH v4 01/13] iommu/arm-smmu-v3: Drop __GFP_ZERO flag from DMA allocation Jean-Philippe Brucker
2019-12-19 16:30   ` Jean-Philippe Brucker
2019-12-19 16:30   ` Jean-Philippe Brucker
2019-12-19 16:30 ` [PATCH v4 02/13] dt-bindings: document PASID property for IOMMU masters Jean-Philippe Brucker
2019-12-19 16:30   ` Jean-Philippe Brucker
2019-12-19 16:30   ` Jean-Philippe Brucker
2019-12-19 16:30 ` [PATCH v4 03/13] iommu/arm-smmu-v3: Parse PASID devicetree property of platform devices Jean-Philippe Brucker
2019-12-19 16:30   ` Jean-Philippe Brucker
2019-12-19 16:30   ` Jean-Philippe Brucker
2019-12-19 16:30 ` [PATCH v4 04/13] ACPI/IORT: Parse SSID property of named component node Jean-Philippe Brucker
2019-12-19 16:30   ` Jean-Philippe Brucker
2019-12-19 16:30   ` Jean-Philippe Brucker
2019-12-19 16:30 ` [PATCH v4 05/13] iommu/arm-smmu-v3: Prepare arm_smmu_s1_cfg for SSID support Jean-Philippe Brucker
2019-12-19 16:30   ` Jean-Philippe Brucker
2019-12-19 16:30   ` Jean-Philippe Brucker
2019-12-19 16:30 ` [PATCH v4 06/13] iommu/arm-smmu-v3: Add context descriptor tables allocators Jean-Philippe Brucker
2019-12-19 16:30   ` Jean-Philippe Brucker
2019-12-19 16:30   ` Jean-Philippe Brucker
2020-01-14 11:06   ` Will Deacon
2020-01-14 11:06     ` Will Deacon
2020-01-14 11:06     ` Will Deacon
2020-01-14 11:52     ` Jean-Philippe Brucker
2020-01-14 11:52       ` Jean-Philippe Brucker
2020-01-14 11:52       ` Jean-Philippe Brucker
2020-01-14 11:56       ` Will Deacon
2020-01-14 11:56         ` Will Deacon
2020-01-14 11:56         ` Will Deacon
2019-12-19 16:30 ` [PATCH v4 07/13] iommu/arm-smmu-v3: Add support for Substream IDs Jean-Philippe Brucker
2019-12-19 16:30   ` Jean-Philippe Brucker
2019-12-19 16:30   ` Jean-Philippe Brucker
2020-01-14 12:38   ` Will Deacon
2020-01-14 12:38     ` Will Deacon
2020-01-14 12:38     ` Will Deacon
2020-01-14 16:30     ` Jean-Philippe Brucker
2020-01-14 16:30       ` Jean-Philippe Brucker
2020-01-14 16:30       ` Jean-Philippe Brucker
2019-12-19 16:30 ` [PATCH v4 08/13] iommu/arm-smmu-v3: Propagate ssid_bits Jean-Philippe Brucker
2019-12-19 16:30   ` Jean-Philippe Brucker
2019-12-19 16:30   ` Jean-Philippe Brucker
2019-12-19 16:30 ` [PATCH v4 09/13] iommu/arm-smmu-v3: Prepare for handling arm_smmu_write_ctx_desc() failure Jean-Philippe Brucker
2019-12-19 16:30   ` Jean-Philippe Brucker
2019-12-19 16:30   ` Jean-Philippe Brucker
2020-01-14 12:42   ` Will Deacon
2020-01-14 12:42     ` Will Deacon
2020-01-14 12:42     ` Will Deacon
2020-01-14 16:31     ` Jean-Philippe Brucker
2020-01-14 16:31       ` Jean-Philippe Brucker
2020-01-14 16:31       ` Jean-Philippe Brucker
2019-12-19 16:30 ` [PATCH v4 10/13] iommu/arm-smmu-v3: Add second level of context descriptor table Jean-Philippe Brucker
2019-12-19 16:30   ` Jean-Philippe Brucker
2019-12-19 16:30   ` Jean-Philippe Brucker
2019-12-20  7:37   ` Auger Eric
2019-12-20  7:37     ` Auger Eric
2019-12-20  7:37     ` Auger Eric
2020-01-14 15:04   ` Will Deacon
2020-01-14 15:04     ` Will Deacon
2020-01-14 15:04     ` Will Deacon
2020-01-15  9:45     ` Jean-Philippe Brucker
2020-01-15  9:45       ` Jean-Philippe Brucker
2020-01-15  9:45       ` Jean-Philippe Brucker
2019-12-19 16:30 ` [PATCH v4 11/13] iommu/arm-smmu-v3: Improve add_device() error handling Jean-Philippe Brucker
2019-12-19 16:30   ` Jean-Philippe Brucker
2019-12-19 16:30   ` Jean-Philippe Brucker
2020-01-14 15:25   ` Will Deacon
2020-01-14 15:25     ` Will Deacon
2020-01-14 15:25     ` Will Deacon
2020-01-15 16:17     ` Will Deacon [this message]
2020-01-15 16:17       ` Will Deacon
2020-01-15 16:17       ` Will Deacon
2020-01-15 17:44     ` Robin Murphy
2020-01-15 17:44       ` Robin Murphy
2020-01-15 17:44       ` Robin Murphy
2019-12-19 16:30 ` [PATCH v4 12/13] PCI/ATS: Add PASID stubs Jean-Philippe Brucker
2019-12-19 16:30   ` Jean-Philippe Brucker
2019-12-19 16:30   ` Jean-Philippe Brucker
2019-12-19 16:30 ` [PATCH v4 13/13] iommu/arm-smmu-v3: Add support for PCI PASID Jean-Philippe Brucker
2019-12-19 16:30   ` Jean-Philippe Brucker
2019-12-19 16:30   ` Jean-Philippe Brucker
2019-12-20  7:37   ` Auger Eric
2019-12-20  7:37     ` Auger Eric
2019-12-20  7:37     ` Auger Eric
2020-01-14 12:45   ` Will Deacon
2020-01-14 12:45     ` Will Deacon
2020-01-14 12:45     ` Will Deacon
2020-01-15  7:57     ` Jean-Philippe Brucker
2020-01-15  7:57       ` Jean-Philippe Brucker
2020-01-15  7:57       ` Jean-Philippe Brucker
2020-01-09 14:36 ` [PATCH v4 00/13] iommu: Add PASID support to Arm SMMUv3 Jean-Philippe Brucker
2020-01-09 14:36   ` Jean-Philippe Brucker
2020-01-09 14:36   ` Jean-Philippe Brucker
2020-01-09 14:41   ` Will Deacon
2020-01-09 14:41     ` Will Deacon
2020-01-09 14:41     ` Will Deacon
2020-01-10  7:15     ` Jean-Philippe Brucker
2020-01-10  7:15       ` Jean-Philippe Brucker
2020-01-10  7:15       ` Jean-Philippe Brucker
2020-01-14 15:40 ` Will Deacon
2020-01-14 15:40   ` Will Deacon
2020-01-14 15:40   ` Will Deacon

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20200115161714.GA30746@willie-the-truck \
    --to=will@kernel.org \
    --cc=bhelgaas@google.com \
    --cc=devicetree@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=eric.auger@redhat.com \
    --cc=guohanjun@huawei.com \
    --cc=iommu@lists.linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=jean-philippe@linaro.org \
    --cc=jonathan.cameron@huawei.com \
    --cc=joro@8bytes.org \
    --cc=lenb@kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=linux-pci@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=lorenzo.pieralisi@arm.com \
    --cc=mark.rutland@arm.com \
    --cc=rjw@rjwysocki.net \
    --cc=robh+dt@kernel.org \
    --cc=robin.murphy@arm.com \
    --cc=sudeep.holla@arm.com \
    --cc=zhangfei.gao@linaro.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.