[PATCH v7 0/3] Cavium ThunderX2 SMMUv3 errata workarounds

[Lorenzo Pieralisi]

Hi Rafael, Lv,

On Thu, Jun 08, 2017 at 07:13:24PM +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 8, 2017 at 6:32 PM, Lorenzo Pieralisi
> <lorenzo.pieralisi at arm.com> wrote:
> > On Tue, May 30, 2017 at 05:33:38PM +0530, Geetha sowjanya wrote:
> >> Cavium ThunderX2 SMMUv3 implementation has two Silicon Erratas.
> >> 1. Errata ID #74
> >>    SMMU register alias Page 1 is not implemented
> >> 2. Errata ID #126
> >>    SMMU doesnt support unique IRQ lines and also MSI for gerror,
> >>    eventq and cmdq-sync
> >>
> >> The following patchset does software workaround for these two erratas.
> >>
> >> This series is based on patchset.
> >> https://www.spinics.net/lists/arm-kernel/msg578443.html
> >
> > Yes so it is not standalone. How are we going to merge these
> > ACPI IORT/ACPICA/SMMU patches - inclusive of:
> >
> > [1] https://www.spinics.net/lists/arm-kernel/msg586458.html
> >
> > Rafael, do ACPICA patches go upstream via the ACPI tree pull request ?
> 
> Not as a rule.

So I take it as the can they go in as separate pull (standalone ACPICA
updates) ?

> > To remove dependency on ACPICA changes this series needs updating
> > anyway and for [1] above I think the only solution is for all the
> > patches to go via the ACPI tree (if ACPICA updates go upstream with it).
> 
> I think we may ask Lv to backport the header changes once they have
> been merged into Linux.
> 
> Lv, would that work?

I was asking to understand how to queue some patches for the upcoming
merge window that have an ACPICA dependency, how are we supposed to
handle that ? I would like to avoid cross tree dependencies, that's why
I asked about the ACPI pull request, so that IORT patches could go via
ACPI tree too this time along with ACPICA changes just trying to make
it simple.

Please let us know, thanks a lot.

Lorenzo