ChanServ changed the topic of #armlinux to: ARM kernel talk [Upstream kernel, find your vendor forums for questions about their kernels] | https://libera.irclog.whitequark.org/armlinux
rvalue has quit [Ping timeout: 256 seconds]
apritzel has quit [Ping timeout: 268 seconds]
rvalue has joined #armlinux
tincho has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
rockosov has quit [Ping timeout: 255 seconds]
ezulian has quit [Ping timeout: 264 seconds]
rockosov has joined #armlinux
jclsn has quit [Ping timeout: 255 seconds]
jclsn has joined #armlinux
heat_ has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
leming has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds]
iivanov has quit []
leming has joined #armlinux
krzk has quit [Ping timeout: 268 seconds]
krzk has joined #armlinux
heartburn has joined #armlinux
amitk has joined #armlinux
mvaittin has joined #armlinux
sally has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
<ukleinek>
krzk: what is strange on your side? Is it only that patches 1 and 4 got sent later? For me (looking at my MUA and lore) the threading looks fine.
<ukleinek>
s/4/3/
<krzk>
ukleinek: they appeared in my inbox under your reply, so I assume you resend new patchset, not send again the same ones
<krzk>
while your other patches (1 & 3) were not in the inbox already
<krzk>
If you send something missing few minutes after initial submission, that would be fine, but if you send 10 hours later after inbox got cleared it's just confusion.
<krzk>
I see only two patches hanging on some unrelated email... Resending entire series in such case is more obvious.
<ukleinek>
krzk: While I'm happy with the resulting thread, I keep that in mind. (But I hope to not foobar a submission like that in the future, so this should be irrelevant)
NSFAF has joined #armlinux
NSFAF_ has joined #armlinux
NSFAF__ has joined #armlinux
NSFAF has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds]
NSFAF has joined #armlinux
NSFAF has quit [Max SendQ exceeded]
NSFAF_ has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds]
NSFAF__ has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
NSFAF has joined #armlinux
NSFAF has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds]
nsaenz has joined #armlinux
psydroid has joined #armlinux
dmart has joined #armlinux
prabhakalad has quit [Ping timeout: 255 seconds]
prabhakalad has joined #armlinux
alpernebbi has joined #armlinux
alpernebbi has joined #armlinux
alpernebbi has quit [Changing host]
NSFAF has joined #armlinux
NSFAF_ has joined #armlinux
NSFAF_ has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
NSFAF_ has joined #armlinux
NSFAF has quit [Ping timeout: 256 seconds]
alpernebbi has quit []
alpernebbi has joined #armlinux
alpernebbi has joined #armlinux
alpernebbi has quit [Changing host]
alpernebbi has quit []
alpernebbi has joined #armlinux
monstr has quit [Ping timeout: 252 seconds]
mvaittin has quit [Ping timeout: 264 seconds]
NSFAF_ has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
elastic_dog has quit [Ping timeout: 264 seconds]
elastic_dog has joined #armlinux
monstr has joined #armlinux
marc|gonzalez has joined #armlinux
marc|gonzalez has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
marc|gonzalez has joined #armlinux
jeeeun8 has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
jeeeun8 has joined #armlinux
<manospitsid>
I'm debugging a possible pci bug on arm64 that causes SErrors, is there a direct way to check if the phys_addr in ioremap_prot in arch/arm64/mm/ioremap.c belongs to a specific (virtio) device?
heat_ has joined #armlinux
heat_ is now known as heat
amitk_ has joined #armlinux
<marc|gonzalez>
About optee: I want to call OPTEE_SMC_CALL_GET_OS_UUID from a driver. Am I supposed to somehow include drivers/tee/optee/optee_smc.h in my source code? That doesn't sound right...
<marc|gonzalez>
Seems that if drivers/tee/optee/optee_smc.h is not in include, it must be because it is private. But I don't see OPTEE_SMC_CALL_GET_OS_UUID anywhere other than in the header and in Documentation/tee/op-tee.rst
<marc|gonzalez>
Are Jens W or Sumit G in the channel, by any chance? :)