Re: [PATCH v3 15/15] iommu: Clean up bus_set_iommu()

[Matthew Rosato <mjrosato@linux.ibm.com>]

On 7/7/22 10:58 AM, Robin Murphy wrote:
> On 2022-07-07 13:54, Matthew Rosato wrote:
>> On 7/7/22 8:49 AM, Matthew Rosato wrote:
>>> On 7/5/22 1:08 PM, Robin Murphy wrote:
>>>> Clean up the remaining trivial bus_set_iommu() callsites along
>>>> with the implementation. Now drivers only have to know and care
>>>> about iommu_device instances, phew!
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@arm.com>
>>>> ---
>>>>
>>>> v3: Also catch Intel's cheeky open-coded assignment
>>>>
>>>
>>> ...
>>>
>>>> diff --git a/drivers/iommu/s390-iommu.c b/drivers/iommu/s390-iommu.c
>>>> index c898bcbbce11..dd957145fb81 100644
>>>> --- a/drivers/iommu/s390-iommu.c
>>>> +++ b/drivers/iommu/s390-iommu.c
>>>> @@ -385,9 +385,3 @@ static const struct iommu_ops s390_iommu_ops = {
>>>>           .free        = s390_domain_free,
>>>>       }
>>>>   };
>>>> -
>>>> -static int __init s390_iommu_init(void)
>>>> -{
>>>> -    return bus_set_iommu(&pci_bus_type, &s390_iommu_ops);
>>>> -}
>>>> -subsys_initcall(s390_iommu_init);
>>>
>>> Previously s390_iommu_ops was only being set for pci_bus_type, but 
>>> with this series it will now also be set for platform_bus_type.
> 
> Ah, indeed I hadn't got as far as fully appreciating that to_zpci_dev() 
> isn't robust enough on its own. Thanks for the patch, I've pulled it in 
> and will include it in v4. Do I take it that all else works OK with this 
> fixed?
> 

Yes, with that patch included this looks OK so for s390 you can also take a

Tested-by: Matthew Rosato <mjrosato@linux.ibm.com>