From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Stephen Warren Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 19/22] iommu/tegra: smmu: Workaround PCIe IOMMU'able Date: Thu, 18 Jul 2013 14:33:02 -0600 Message-ID: <51E850FE.4000506@wwwdotorg.org> References: <1373021097-32420-1-git-send-email-hdoyu@nvidia.com> <1373021097-32420-20-git-send-email-hdoyu@nvidia.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <1373021097-32420-20-git-send-email-hdoyu-DDmLM1+adcrQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org> Sender: linux-tegra-owner-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org To: Hiroshi Doyu Cc: iommu-cunTk1MwBs9QetFLy7KEm3xJsTq8ys+cHZ5vskTnxNA@public.gmane.org, linux-tegra-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, linux-arm-kernel-IAPFreCvJWM7uuMidbF8XUB+6BGkLq7r@public.gmane.org, thierry.reding-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org List-Id: linux-tegra@vger.kernel.org On 07/05/2013 04:44 AM, Hiroshi Doyu wrote: > Make PCIe work as it is. IOMMU support can be implemented later. We > need the same kind of registration framework for PCIe as platform_bus > does currently. > diff --git a/drivers/iommu/tegra-smmu.c b/drivers/iommu/tegra-smmu.c > for_each_set_bit(i, (unsigned long *)&map, > sizeof(map) * BITS_PER_BYTE) { > + if (i == TEGRA_SWGROUP_AFI) /* FIXME: IOMMU'able PCIe */ > + continue; Isn't it just a fluke that TEGRA_SWGROUP_AFI is defined identically for the SoCs that we support upstream? If this change is required, don't we need it before the SMMU starts enabling itself for clients, so that git bisect is maintained? By deferring the question of registering the IOMMU for PCIe, ar we going to require non-backwards-compatible changes to DT for the PCIe controller at some later point in time? From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: swarren@wwwdotorg.org (Stephen Warren) Date: Thu, 18 Jul 2013 14:33:02 -0600 Subject: [PATCH v2 19/22] iommu/tegra: smmu: Workaround PCIe IOMMU'able In-Reply-To: <1373021097-32420-20-git-send-email-hdoyu@nvidia.com> References: <1373021097-32420-1-git-send-email-hdoyu@nvidia.com> <1373021097-32420-20-git-send-email-hdoyu@nvidia.com> Message-ID: <51E850FE.4000506@wwwdotorg.org> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On 07/05/2013 04:44 AM, Hiroshi Doyu wrote: > Make PCIe work as it is. IOMMU support can be implemented later. We > need the same kind of registration framework for PCIe as platform_bus > does currently. > diff --git a/drivers/iommu/tegra-smmu.c b/drivers/iommu/tegra-smmu.c > for_each_set_bit(i, (unsigned long *)&map, > sizeof(map) * BITS_PER_BYTE) { > + if (i == TEGRA_SWGROUP_AFI) /* FIXME: IOMMU'able PCIe */ > + continue; Isn't it just a fluke that TEGRA_SWGROUP_AFI is defined identically for the SoCs that we support upstream? If this change is required, don't we need it before the SMMU starts enabling itself for clients, so that git bisect is maintained? By deferring the question of registering the IOMMU for PCIe, ar we going to require non-backwards-compatible changes to DT for the PCIe controller at some later point in time?