On Wed, Apr 30, 2025 at 03:15:14PM +0200, Niklas Schnelle wrote:
> > diff --git a/drivers/iommu/s390-iommu.c b/drivers/iommu/s390-iommu.c
> > index 433b59f435302b..9c80d61deb2c0b 100644
> > --- a/drivers/iommu/s390-iommu.c
> > +++ b/drivers/iommu/s390-iommu.c
> > @@ -557,6 +557,7 @@ static struct iommu_domain *s390_domain_alloc_paging(struct device *dev)
> > }
> > zdev->end_dma = zdev->start_dma + aperture_size - 1;
> >
> > + s390_domain->domain.pgsize_bitmap = SZ_4K;
> > s390_domain->domain.geometry.force_aperture = true;
> > s390_domain->domain.geometry.aperture_start = 0;
> > s390_domain->domain.geometry.aperture_end = max_tbl_size(s390_domain);
> > @@ -1158,7 +1159,6 @@ static struct iommu_domain blocking_domain = {
> > .domain_alloc_paging = s390_domain_alloc_paging, \
> > .probe_device = s390_iommu_probe_device, \
> > .device_group = generic_device_group, \
> > - .pgsize_bitmap = SZ_4K, \
> > .get_resv_regions = s390_iommu_get_resv_regions, \
> > .default_domain_ops = &(const struct iommu_domain_ops) { \
> > .attach_dev = s390_iommu_attach_device, \
>
> I'm guessing there's no particular thought behind not adding an empty
> line for s390-iommu.c like for the others? I slightly prefer not having
> an empty line here but would be fine with it too, so just curious.
I think it was just done at a different time, I had to rebase this
hunk..
Thanks,
Jason
