Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
Date:   Thu, 23 Jun 2022 07:42:11 +0200
From:   Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
To:     Mathieu Poirier <mathieu.poirier@linaro.org>
Cc:     Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>,
        Mark-PK Tsai <mark-pk.tsai@mediatek.com>,
        bjorn.andersson@linaro.org, robin.murphy@arm.com,
        m.szyprowski@samsung.com, matthias.bgg@gmail.com,
        linux-remoteproc@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        iommu@lists.linux-foundation.org,
        linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
        linux-mediatek@lists.infradead.org, yj.chiang@mediatek.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] dma-mapping, remoteproc: Fix dma_mem leak after
 rproc_shutdown
Message-ID: <20220623054211.GA12408@lst.de>
References: <20220422062436.14384-1-mark-pk.tsai@mediatek.com> <20220423174650.GA29219@lst.de> <20220622162540.GA1606016@p14s>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20220622162540.GA1606016@p14s>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.17 (2007-11-01)
Precedence: bulk

On Wed, Jun 22, 2022 at 10:25:40AM -0600, Mathieu Poirier wrote:
> On Sat, Apr 23, 2022 at 07:46:50PM +0200, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> > Sigh.  In theory drivers should never declare coherent memory like
> > this, and there has been some work to fix remoteproc in that regard.
> > 
> > But I guess until that is merged we'll need somthing like this fix.
> 
> Should I take this in the remoteproc tree?  If so, can I get an RB?

Reluctantly-Acked-by: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>