From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1760378AbZBYPmj (ORCPT ); Wed, 25 Feb 2009 10:42:39 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1753006AbZBYPma (ORCPT ); Wed, 25 Feb 2009 10:42:30 -0500 Received: from mx2.mail.elte.hu ([157.181.151.9]:38808 "EHLO mx2.mail.elte.hu" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750900AbZBYPm3 (ORCPT ); Wed, 25 Feb 2009 10:42:29 -0500 Date: Wed, 25 Feb 2009 16:41:15 +0100 From: Ingo Molnar To: "Pallipadi, Venkatesh" Cc: Linus Torvalds , Dave Airlie , Jesse Barnes , Eric Anholt , Thomas Gleixner , H Peter Anvin , Keith Packard , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" Subject: Re: [patch 0/4] gpu/drm, x86, PAT: Add PAT support for io_mapping_* interface Message-ID: <20090225154115.GA12050@elte.hu> References: <20090225013510.010493000@intel.com> <20090225120839.GC14279@elte.hu> <7E82351C108FA840AB1866AC776AEC464A6A209C@orsmsx505.amr.corp.intel.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <7E82351C108FA840AB1866AC776AEC464A6A209C@orsmsx505.amr.corp.intel.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17) X-ELTE-VirusStatus: clean X-ELTE-SpamScore: -1.5 X-ELTE-SpamLevel: X-ELTE-SpamCheck: no X-ELTE-SpamVersion: ELTE 2.0 X-ELTE-SpamCheck-Details: score=-1.5 required=5.9 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=no SpamAssassin version=3.2.3 -1.5 BAYES_00 BODY: Bayesian spam probability is 0 to 1% [score: 0.0000] Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org * Pallipadi, Venkatesh wrote: > >They will probably fix a few regressions and are easy to > >revert, plus they affect the one driver whose authors wrote > >these facilities: > > > > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_dma.c > > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem.c > > > >so maybe we should try it as it's all a clear step forward. > >I'll give them a spin in tip:x86/urgent. Dunno. > > Actual PAT support (patch 3 and 4) can probably wait until > .30. As there is only one user of this interface. Patch 1 and > 2 are more in bugfix category and probably considered for .29. ok, i've delayed #3/#4 to .30 and kept #1/#2 in tip:x86/urgent. No complications so far with any of them. Ingo