Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20210202095110.1215346-1-hch@lst.de> <20210207184855.GA27553@lst.de>
 <CAAFQd5BzAvgiTLGFse+ZWUrFtZ1Ysf+p+e-4rW8gq_iP0xhWEA@mail.gmail.com>
 <20210209082213.GA31902@lst.de> <CANiDSCuzKczCnAdC9b0r-6WVBFYXYnvQHKbxSeYq2QW1uVsDLQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <CANiDSCvPodsmcOi1fMwvZsyMxWsRQWNT7VkbZs4=XePYXfiXow@mail.gmail.com>
 <20210209170217.GA10199@lst.de> <CANiDSCs8dXVoWuwkVs=v+=s770MpzH1xiDuj-080-98ynuz97g@mail.gmail.com>
 <20210211130625.GA20155@lst.de>
In-Reply-To: <20210211130625.GA20155@lst.de>
From:   Ricardo Ribalda <ribalda@chromium.org>
Date:   Thu, 11 Feb 2021 14:20:30 +0100
Message-ID: <CANiDSCupVLQMbJVKrrKBJvJxHgteeVFik7LAJy5zbUi2ESwsGA@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: add a new dma_alloc_noncontiguous API v2
To:     Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
Cc:     Tomasz Figa <tfiga@chromium.org>,
        Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab@kernel.org>,
        Marek Szyprowski <m.szyprowski@samsung.com>,
        Sergey Senozhatsky <senozhatsky@google.com>,
        "open list:IOMMU DRIVERS" <iommu@lists.linux-foundation.org>,
        Linux Media Mailing List <linux-media@vger.kernel.org>,
        Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@arm.com>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Linux Doc Mailing List <linux-doc@vger.kernel.org>,
        Laurent Pinchart <laurent.pinchart@ideasonboard.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Precedence: bulk

HI Christoph

On Thu, Feb 11, 2021 at 2:06 PM Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de> wrote:
>
> On Thu, Feb 11, 2021 at 10:08:18AM +0100, Ricardo Ribalda wrote:
> > Hi Christoph
> >
> > What are your merge plans for the uvc change?
> > http://git.infradead.org/users/hch/dma-mapping.git/commit/3dc47131f8aacc2093f68a9971d24c754e435520
> >
> > Are you going to remove the patch on your Merge request and then send
> > it for review to Laurent? or merge it through your tree with a S-o-B
> > him?
>
> I though I had all the ACKs to queue it up.  Is that not what was
> intended?  Queueing up the API without a user is generally a bad idea.
>

I am pretty sure we need the ack from Laurent. He maintains uvc

@Laurent Pinchart what are your thoughts?

Thanks!


-- 
Ricardo Ribalda