Re: [PATCH 0/3] Apple M1 DART IOMMU driver

From: Sven Peter via iommu <iommu@lists.linux-foundation.org>
To: "Robin Murphy" <robin.murphy@arm.com>,
	"Rob Herring" <robh@kernel.org>,
	"Mark Kettenis" <mark.kettenis@xs4all.nl>
Cc: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@kernel.org>,
	devicetree@vger.kernel.org, Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>,
	Hector Martin <marcan@marcan.st>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, iommu@lists.linux-foundation.org,
	mohamed.mediouni@caramail.com, Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>,
	linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, stan@corellium.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/3] Apple M1 DART IOMMU driver
Date: Sat, 27 Mar 2021 16:33:29 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <26c9b3cc-a04f-444d-ada4-0c9bc99684e5@www.fastmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <33b3ce35-c42f-331a-79a2-e38917d588ef@arm.com>

Hi Robin,

On Thu, Mar 25, 2021, at 12:50, Robin Murphy wrote:
> On 2021-03-25 07:53, Sven Peter wrote:
> > The iommu binding documentation [1] mentions that
> > 
> >      The device tree node of the IOMMU device's parent bus must contain a valid
> >      "dma-ranges" property that describes how the physical address space of the
> >      IOMMU maps to memory. An empty "dma-ranges" property means that there is a
> >      1:1 mapping from IOMMU to memory.
> > 
> > which, if I understand this correctly, means that the 'dma-ranges' for the
> > parent bus of the iommu should be empty since the DART hardware can see the
> > full physical address space with a 1:1 mapping.
> > 
> > 
> > The documentation also mentions that
> > 
> >       When an "iommus" property is specified in a device tree node, the IOMMU
> >       will be used for address translation. If a "dma-ranges" property exists
> >       in the device's parent node it will be ignored.
> > 
> > which means that specifying a 'dma-ranges' in the parent bus of any devices
> > that use the iommu will just be ignored.
> 
> I think that's just wrong and wants updating (or at least clarifying). 
> The high-level view now is that we use "dma-ranges" to describe 
> limitations imposed by a bridge or interconnect segment, and that can 
> certainly happen upstream of an IOMMU. As it happens, I've just recently 
> sent a patch for precisely that case[1].
> 
> I guess what it might have been trying to say is that "dma-ranges" 
> *does* become irrelevant in terms of constraining what physical memory 
> is usable for DMA, but that shouldn't imply that its meaning doesn't 
> just shift to a different purpose.

Should I add a patch to clarify this paragraph for v2 or submit a separate
one-off patch? I'm not entirely sure about the process here but I could add
a Suggested-by: to the commit if that's fine with you.

Best,

Sven
_______________________________________________
iommu mailing list
iommu@lists.linux-foundation.org
https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/iommu