[PATCH 0/2] iommu/arm-smmu: Allow client devices to select direct mapping

[PATCH 0/2] iommu/arm-smmu: Allow client devices to select direct mapping

[Sai Prakash Ranjan]

This series allows drm devices to set a default identity
mapping using iommu_request_dm_for_dev(). First patch is
a cleanup to support other SoCs to call into QCOM specific
implementation and preparation for second patch.
Second patch sets the default identity domain for drm devices.

Jordan Crouse (1):
  iommu/arm-smmu: Allow client devices to select direct mapping

Sai Prakash Ranjan (1):
  iommu: arm-smmu-impl: Convert to a generic reset implementation

 drivers/iommu/arm-smmu-impl.c |  8 +++--
 drivers/iommu/arm-smmu-qcom.c | 55 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--
 drivers/iommu/arm-smmu.c      |  3 ++
 drivers/iommu/arm-smmu.h      |  5 ++++
 4 files changed, 65 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)

-- 
QUALCOMM INDIA, on behalf of Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member
of Code Aurora Forum, hosted by The Linux Foundation

[PATCH 1/2] iommu: arm-smmu-impl: Convert to a generic reset implementation

[Sai Prakash Ranjan]

Currently the QCOM specific smmu reset implementation is very
specific to SDM845 SoC and has a wait-for-safe logic which
may not be required for other SoCs. So move the SDM845 specific
logic to its specific reset function. Also add SC7180 SMMU
compatible for calling into QCOM specific implementation.

Signed-off-by: Sai Prakash Ranjan <saiprakash.ranjan@codeaurora.org>
---
 drivers/iommu/arm-smmu-impl.c |  8 +++++---
 drivers/iommu/arm-smmu-qcom.c | 16 +++++++++++++---
 2 files changed, 18 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/iommu/arm-smmu-impl.c b/drivers/iommu/arm-smmu-impl.c
index 74d97a886e93..c75b9d957b70 100644
--- a/drivers/iommu/arm-smmu-impl.c
+++ b/drivers/iommu/arm-smmu-impl.c
@@ -150,6 +150,8 @@ static const struct arm_smmu_impl arm_mmu500_impl = {
 
 struct arm_smmu_device *arm_smmu_impl_init(struct arm_smmu_device *smmu)
 {
+	const struct device_node *np = smmu->dev->of_node;
+
 	/*
 	 * We will inevitably have to combine model-specific implementation
 	 * quirks with platform-specific integration quirks, but everything
@@ -166,11 +168,11 @@ struct arm_smmu_device *arm_smmu_impl_init(struct arm_smmu_device *smmu)
 		break;
 	}
 
-	if (of_property_read_bool(smmu->dev->of_node,
-				  "calxeda,smmu-secure-config-access"))
+	if (of_property_read_bool(np, "calxeda,smmu-secure-config-access"))
 		smmu->impl = &calxeda_impl;
 
-	if (of_device_is_compatible(smmu->dev->of_node, "qcom,sdm845-smmu-500"))
+	if (of_device_is_compatible(np, "qcom,sdm845-smmu-500") ||
+	    of_device_is_compatible(np, "qcom,sc7180-smmu-500"))
 		return qcom_smmu_impl_init(smmu);
 
 	return smmu;
diff --git a/drivers/iommu/arm-smmu-qcom.c b/drivers/iommu/arm-smmu-qcom.c
index 24c071c1d8b0..64a4ab270ab7 100644
--- a/drivers/iommu/arm-smmu-qcom.c
+++ b/drivers/iommu/arm-smmu-qcom.c
@@ -15,8 +15,6 @@ static int qcom_sdm845_smmu500_reset(struct arm_smmu_device *smmu)
 {
 	int ret;
 
-	arm_mmu500_reset(smmu);
-
 	/*
 	 * To address performance degradation in non-real time clients,
 	 * such as USB and UFS, turn off wait-for-safe on sdm845 based boards,
@@ -30,8 +28,20 @@ static int qcom_sdm845_smmu500_reset(struct arm_smmu_device *smmu)
 	return ret;
 }
 
+static int qcom_smmu500_reset(struct arm_smmu_device *smmu)
+{
+	const struct device_node *np = smmu->dev->of_node;
+
+	arm_mmu500_reset(smmu);
+
+	if (of_device_is_compatible(np, "qcom,sdm845-smmu-500"))
+		return qcom_sdm845_smmu500_reset(smmu);
+
+	return 0;
+}
+
 static const struct arm_smmu_impl qcom_smmu_impl = {
-	.reset = qcom_sdm845_smmu500_reset,
+	.reset = qcom_smmu500_reset,
 };
 
 struct arm_smmu_device *qcom_smmu_impl_init(struct arm_smmu_device *smmu)
-- 
QUALCOMM INDIA, on behalf of Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member
of Code Aurora Forum, hosted by The Linux Foundation

Re: [PATCH 1/2] iommu: arm-smmu-impl: Convert to a generic reset implementation

[Bjorn Andersson]

On Wed 22 Jan 03:48 PST 2020, Sai Prakash Ranjan wrote:

> Currently the QCOM specific smmu reset implementation is very
> specific to SDM845 SoC and has a wait-for-safe logic which
> may not be required for other SoCs. So move the SDM845 specific
> logic to its specific reset function. Also add SC7180 SMMU
> compatible for calling into QCOM specific implementation.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Sai Prakash Ranjan <saiprakash.ranjan@codeaurora.org>

Reviewed-by: Bjorn Andersson <bjorn.andersson@linaro.org>

Regards,
Bjorn

> ---
>  drivers/iommu/arm-smmu-impl.c |  8 +++++---
>  drivers/iommu/arm-smmu-qcom.c | 16 +++++++++++++---
>  2 files changed, 18 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/iommu/arm-smmu-impl.c b/drivers/iommu/arm-smmu-impl.c
> index 74d97a886e93..c75b9d957b70 100644
> --- a/drivers/iommu/arm-smmu-impl.c
> +++ b/drivers/iommu/arm-smmu-impl.c
> @@ -150,6 +150,8 @@ static const struct arm_smmu_impl arm_mmu500_impl = {
>  
>  struct arm_smmu_device *arm_smmu_impl_init(struct arm_smmu_device *smmu)
>  {
> +	const struct device_node *np = smmu->dev->of_node;
> +
>  	/*
>  	 * We will inevitably have to combine model-specific implementation
>  	 * quirks with platform-specific integration quirks, but everything
> @@ -166,11 +168,11 @@ struct arm_smmu_device *arm_smmu_impl_init(struct arm_smmu_device *smmu)
>  		break;
>  	}
>  
> -	if (of_property_read_bool(smmu->dev->of_node,
> -				  "calxeda,smmu-secure-config-access"))
> +	if (of_property_read_bool(np, "calxeda,smmu-secure-config-access"))
>  		smmu->impl = &calxeda_impl;
>  
> -	if (of_device_is_compatible(smmu->dev->of_node, "qcom,sdm845-smmu-500"))
> +	if (of_device_is_compatible(np, "qcom,sdm845-smmu-500") ||
> +	    of_device_is_compatible(np, "qcom,sc7180-smmu-500"))
>  		return qcom_smmu_impl_init(smmu);
>  
>  	return smmu;
> diff --git a/drivers/iommu/arm-smmu-qcom.c b/drivers/iommu/arm-smmu-qcom.c
> index 24c071c1d8b0..64a4ab270ab7 100644
> --- a/drivers/iommu/arm-smmu-qcom.c
> +++ b/drivers/iommu/arm-smmu-qcom.c
> @@ -15,8 +15,6 @@ static int qcom_sdm845_smmu500_reset(struct arm_smmu_device *smmu)
>  {
>  	int ret;
>  
> -	arm_mmu500_reset(smmu);
> -
>  	/*
>  	 * To address performance degradation in non-real time clients,
>  	 * such as USB and UFS, turn off wait-for-safe on sdm845 based boards,
> @@ -30,8 +28,20 @@ static int qcom_sdm845_smmu500_reset(struct arm_smmu_device *smmu)
>  	return ret;
>  }
>  
> +static int qcom_smmu500_reset(struct arm_smmu_device *smmu)
> +{
> +	const struct device_node *np = smmu->dev->of_node;
> +
> +	arm_mmu500_reset(smmu);
> +
> +	if (of_device_is_compatible(np, "qcom,sdm845-smmu-500"))
> +		return qcom_sdm845_smmu500_reset(smmu);
> +
> +	return 0;
> +}
> +
>  static const struct arm_smmu_impl qcom_smmu_impl = {
> -	.reset = qcom_sdm845_smmu500_reset,
> +	.reset = qcom_smmu500_reset,
>  };
>  
>  struct arm_smmu_device *qcom_smmu_impl_init(struct arm_smmu_device *smmu)
> -- 
> QUALCOMM INDIA, on behalf of Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member
> of Code Aurora Forum, hosted by The Linux Foundation

Re: [PATCH 1/2] iommu: arm-smmu-impl: Convert to a generic reset implementation

[Stephen Boyd]

Quoting Sai Prakash Ranjan (2020-01-22 03:48:01)
> Currently the QCOM specific smmu reset implementation is very
> specific to SDM845 SoC and has a wait-for-safe logic which
> may not be required for other SoCs. So move the SDM845 specific
> logic to its specific reset function. Also add SC7180 SMMU
> compatible for calling into QCOM specific implementation.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Sai Prakash Ranjan <saiprakash.ranjan@codeaurora.org>
> ---

Reviewed-by: Stephen Boyd <swboyd@chromium.org>

Re: [PATCH 1/2] iommu: arm-smmu-impl: Convert to a generic reset implementation

[Robin Murphy]

On 2020-01-22 11:48 am, Sai Prakash Ranjan wrote:
> Currently the QCOM specific smmu reset implementation is very
> specific to SDM845 SoC and has a wait-for-safe logic which
> may not be required for other SoCs. So move the SDM845 specific
> logic to its specific reset function. Also add SC7180 SMMU
> compatible for calling into QCOM specific implementation.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Sai Prakash Ranjan <saiprakash.ranjan@codeaurora.org>
> ---
>   drivers/iommu/arm-smmu-impl.c |  8 +++++---
>   drivers/iommu/arm-smmu-qcom.c | 16 +++++++++++++---
>   2 files changed, 18 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/iommu/arm-smmu-impl.c b/drivers/iommu/arm-smmu-impl.c
> index 74d97a886e93..c75b9d957b70 100644
> --- a/drivers/iommu/arm-smmu-impl.c
> +++ b/drivers/iommu/arm-smmu-impl.c
> @@ -150,6 +150,8 @@ static const struct arm_smmu_impl arm_mmu500_impl = {
>   
>   struct arm_smmu_device *arm_smmu_impl_init(struct arm_smmu_device *smmu)
>   {
> +	const struct device_node *np = smmu->dev->of_node;
> +
>   	/*
>   	 * We will inevitably have to combine model-specific implementation
>   	 * quirks with platform-specific integration quirks, but everything
> @@ -166,11 +168,11 @@ struct arm_smmu_device *arm_smmu_impl_init(struct arm_smmu_device *smmu)
>   		break;
>   	}
>   
> -	if (of_property_read_bool(smmu->dev->of_node,
> -				  "calxeda,smmu-secure-config-access"))
> +	if (of_property_read_bool(np, "calxeda,smmu-secure-config-access"))
>   		smmu->impl = &calxeda_impl;
>   
> -	if (of_device_is_compatible(smmu->dev->of_node, "qcom,sdm845-smmu-500"))
> +	if (of_device_is_compatible(np, "qcom,sdm845-smmu-500") ||
> +	    of_device_is_compatible(np, "qcom,sc7180-smmu-500"))
>   		return qcom_smmu_impl_init(smmu);
>   
>   	return smmu;
> diff --git a/drivers/iommu/arm-smmu-qcom.c b/drivers/iommu/arm-smmu-qcom.c
> index 24c071c1d8b0..64a4ab270ab7 100644
> --- a/drivers/iommu/arm-smmu-qcom.c
> +++ b/drivers/iommu/arm-smmu-qcom.c
> @@ -15,8 +15,6 @@ static int qcom_sdm845_smmu500_reset(struct arm_smmu_device *smmu)
>   {
>   	int ret;
>   
> -	arm_mmu500_reset(smmu);
> -
>   	/*
>   	 * To address performance degradation in non-real time clients,
>   	 * such as USB and UFS, turn off wait-for-safe on sdm845 based boards,
> @@ -30,8 +28,20 @@ static int qcom_sdm845_smmu500_reset(struct arm_smmu_device *smmu)
>   	return ret;
>   }
>   
> +static int qcom_smmu500_reset(struct arm_smmu_device *smmu)
> +{
> +	const struct device_node *np = smmu->dev->of_node;
> +
> +	arm_mmu500_reset(smmu);
> +
> +	if (of_device_is_compatible(np, "qcom,sdm845-smmu-500"))
> +		return qcom_sdm845_smmu500_reset(smmu);
> +
> +	return 0;
> +}
> +
>   static const struct arm_smmu_impl qcom_smmu_impl = {
> -	.reset = qcom_sdm845_smmu500_reset,
> +	.reset = qcom_smmu500_reset,
>   };

It might be logical to have a separate SDM845 impl rather than 
indirecting within the callback itself, but I'm not too concerned either 
way. For the arm-smmu-impl.c changes,

Reviewed-by: Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@arm.com>

Thanks,
Robin.

>   
>   struct arm_smmu_device *qcom_smmu_impl_init(struct arm_smmu_device *smmu)
> 

[PATCH 2/2] iommu/arm-smmu: Allow client devices to select direct mapping

[Sai Prakash Ranjan]

From: Jordan Crouse <jcrouse@codeaurora.org>

Some client devices want to directly map the IOMMU themselves instead
of using the DMA domain. Allow those devices to opt in to direct
mapping by way of a list of compatible strings.

Signed-off-by: Jordan Crouse <jcrouse@codeaurora.org>
Co-developed-by: Sai Prakash Ranjan <saiprakash.ranjan@codeaurora.org>
Signed-off-by: Sai Prakash Ranjan <saiprakash.ranjan@codeaurora.org>
---
 drivers/iommu/arm-smmu-qcom.c | 39 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
 drivers/iommu/arm-smmu.c      |  3 +++
 drivers/iommu/arm-smmu.h      |  5 +++++
 3 files changed, 47 insertions(+)

diff --git a/drivers/iommu/arm-smmu-qcom.c b/drivers/iommu/arm-smmu-qcom.c
index 64a4ab270ab7..ff746acd1c81 100644
--- a/drivers/iommu/arm-smmu-qcom.c
+++ b/drivers/iommu/arm-smmu-qcom.c
@@ -3,6 +3,7 @@
  * Copyright (c) 2019, The Linux Foundation. All rights reserved.
  */
 
+#include <linux/of_device.h>
 #include <linux/qcom_scm.h>
 
 #include "arm-smmu.h"
@@ -11,6 +12,43 @@ struct qcom_smmu {
 	struct arm_smmu_device smmu;
 };
 
+static const struct arm_smmu_client_match_data qcom_adreno = {
+	.direct_mapping = true,
+};
+
+static const struct arm_smmu_client_match_data qcom_mdss = {
+	.direct_mapping = true,
+};
+
+static const struct of_device_id qcom_smmu_client_of_match[] = {
+	{ .compatible = "qcom,adreno", .data = &qcom_adreno },
+	{ .compatible = "qcom,mdp4", .data = &qcom_mdss },
+	{ .compatible = "qcom,mdss", .data = &qcom_mdss },
+	{ .compatible = "qcom,sc7180-mdss", .data = &qcom_mdss },
+	{ .compatible = "qcom,sdm845-mdss", .data = &qcom_mdss },
+	{},
+};
+
+static const struct arm_smmu_client_match_data *
+qcom_smmu_client_data(struct device *dev)
+{
+	const struct of_device_id *match =
+		of_match_device(qcom_smmu_client_of_match, dev);
+
+	return match ? match->data : NULL;
+}
+
+static int qcom_smmu_request_domain(struct device *dev)
+{
+	const struct arm_smmu_client_match_data *client;
+
+	client = qcom_smmu_client_data(dev);
+	if (client)
+		iommu_request_dm_for_dev(dev);
+
+	return 0;
+}
+
 static int qcom_sdm845_smmu500_reset(struct arm_smmu_device *smmu)
 {
 	int ret;
@@ -41,6 +79,7 @@ static int qcom_smmu500_reset(struct arm_smmu_device *smmu)
 }
 
 static const struct arm_smmu_impl qcom_smmu_impl = {
+	.req_domain = qcom_smmu_request_domain,
 	.reset = qcom_smmu500_reset,
 };
 
diff --git a/drivers/iommu/arm-smmu.c b/drivers/iommu/arm-smmu.c
index 16c4b87af42b..67dd9326247a 100644
--- a/drivers/iommu/arm-smmu.c
+++ b/drivers/iommu/arm-smmu.c
@@ -1448,6 +1448,9 @@ static int arm_smmu_add_device(struct device *dev)
 	device_link_add(dev, smmu->dev,
 			DL_FLAG_PM_RUNTIME | DL_FLAG_AUTOREMOVE_SUPPLIER);
 
+	if (smmu->impl && smmu->impl->req_domain)
+		return smmu->impl->req_domain(dev);
+
 	return 0;
 
 out_cfg_free:
diff --git a/drivers/iommu/arm-smmu.h b/drivers/iommu/arm-smmu.h
index 8d1cd54d82a6..059dc9c39f64 100644
--- a/drivers/iommu/arm-smmu.h
+++ b/drivers/iommu/arm-smmu.h
@@ -244,6 +244,10 @@ enum arm_smmu_arch_version {
 	ARM_SMMU_V2,
 };
 
+struct arm_smmu_client_match_data {
+	bool direct_mapping;
+};
+
 enum arm_smmu_implementation {
 	GENERIC_SMMU,
 	ARM_MMU500,
@@ -386,6 +390,7 @@ struct arm_smmu_impl {
 	int (*init_context)(struct arm_smmu_domain *smmu_domain);
 	void (*tlb_sync)(struct arm_smmu_device *smmu, int page, int sync,
 			 int status);
+	int (*req_domain)(struct device *dev);
 };
 
 static inline void __iomem *arm_smmu_page(struct arm_smmu_device *smmu, int n)
-- 
QUALCOMM INDIA, on behalf of Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member
of Code Aurora Forum, hosted by The Linux Foundation

Re: [PATCH 2/2] iommu/arm-smmu: Allow client devices to select direct mapping

[Evan Green]

On Wed, Jan 22, 2020 at 3:48 AM Sai Prakash Ranjan
<saiprakash.ranjan@codeaurora.org> wrote:
>
> From: Jordan Crouse <jcrouse@codeaurora.org>
>
> Some client devices want to directly map the IOMMU themselves instead
> of using the DMA domain. Allow those devices to opt in to direct
> mapping by way of a list of compatible strings.
>
> Signed-off-by: Jordan Crouse <jcrouse@codeaurora.org>
> Co-developed-by: Sai Prakash Ranjan <saiprakash.ranjan@codeaurora.org>
> Signed-off-by: Sai Prakash Ranjan <saiprakash.ranjan@codeaurora.org>
> ---
>  drivers/iommu/arm-smmu-qcom.c | 39 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>  drivers/iommu/arm-smmu.c      |  3 +++
>  drivers/iommu/arm-smmu.h      |  5 +++++
>  3 files changed, 47 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/iommu/arm-smmu-qcom.c b/drivers/iommu/arm-smmu-qcom.c
> index 64a4ab270ab7..ff746acd1c81 100644
> --- a/drivers/iommu/arm-smmu-qcom.c
> +++ b/drivers/iommu/arm-smmu-qcom.c
> @@ -3,6 +3,7 @@
>   * Copyright (c) 2019, The Linux Foundation. All rights reserved.
>   */
>
> +#include <linux/of_device.h>
>  #include <linux/qcom_scm.h>
>
>  #include "arm-smmu.h"
> @@ -11,6 +12,43 @@ struct qcom_smmu {
>         struct arm_smmu_device smmu;
>  };
>
> +static const struct arm_smmu_client_match_data qcom_adreno = {
> +       .direct_mapping = true,
> +};
> +
> +static const struct arm_smmu_client_match_data qcom_mdss = {
> +       .direct_mapping = true,

I don't actually see direct_mapping being used. Shouldn't this member
be checked somewhere?

-Evan

Re: [PATCH 2/2] iommu/arm-smmu: Allow client devices to select direct mapping

[Sai Prakash Ranjan]

Hi Evan,

On 2020-04-14 04:42, Evan Green wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 22, 2020 at 3:48 AM Sai Prakash Ranjan
> <saiprakash.ranjan@codeaurora.org> wrote:
>> 
>> From: Jordan Crouse <jcrouse@codeaurora.org>
>> 
>> Some client devices want to directly map the IOMMU themselves instead
>> of using the DMA domain. Allow those devices to opt in to direct
>> mapping by way of a list of compatible strings.
>> 
>> Signed-off-by: Jordan Crouse <jcrouse@codeaurora.org>
>> Co-developed-by: Sai Prakash Ranjan <saiprakash.ranjan@codeaurora.org>
>> Signed-off-by: Sai Prakash Ranjan <saiprakash.ranjan@codeaurora.org>
>> ---
>>  drivers/iommu/arm-smmu-qcom.c | 39 
>> +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>  drivers/iommu/arm-smmu.c      |  3 +++
>>  drivers/iommu/arm-smmu.h      |  5 +++++
>>  3 files changed, 47 insertions(+)
>> 
>> diff --git a/drivers/iommu/arm-smmu-qcom.c 
>> b/drivers/iommu/arm-smmu-qcom.c
>> index 64a4ab270ab7..ff746acd1c81 100644
>> --- a/drivers/iommu/arm-smmu-qcom.c
>> +++ b/drivers/iommu/arm-smmu-qcom.c
>> @@ -3,6 +3,7 @@
>>   * Copyright (c) 2019, The Linux Foundation. All rights reserved.
>>   */
>> 
>> +#include <linux/of_device.h>
>>  #include <linux/qcom_scm.h>
>> 
>>  #include "arm-smmu.h"
>> @@ -11,6 +12,43 @@ struct qcom_smmu {
>>         struct arm_smmu_device smmu;
>>  };
>> 
>> +static const struct arm_smmu_client_match_data qcom_adreno = {
>> +       .direct_mapping = true,
>> +};
>> +
>> +static const struct arm_smmu_client_match_data qcom_mdss = {
>> +       .direct_mapping = true,
> 
> I don't actually see direct_mapping being used. Shouldn't this member
> be checked somewhere?
> 

Thanks for spotting this, my bad. It should be checked in 
qcom_smmu_request_domain().

diff --git a/drivers/iommu/arm-smmu-qcom.c 
b/drivers/iommu/arm-smmu-qcom.c
index ff746acd1c81..3ff62ca13ad5 100644
--- a/drivers/iommu/arm-smmu-qcom.c
+++ b/drivers/iommu/arm-smmu-qcom.c
@@ -43,7 +43,7 @@ static int qcom_smmu_request_domain(struct device 
*dev)
         const struct arm_smmu_client_match_data *client;

         client = qcom_smmu_client_data(dev);
-       if (client)
+       if (client && client->direct_mapping)
                 iommu_request_dm_for_dev(dev);

         return 0;

-Sai

-- 
QUALCOMM INDIA, on behalf of Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a 
member
of Code Aurora Forum, hosted by The Linux Foundation

Re: [PATCH 2/2] iommu/arm-smmu: Allow client devices to select direct mapping

[Robin Murphy]

On 2020-01-22 11:48 am, Sai Prakash Ranjan wrote:
> From: Jordan Crouse <jcrouse@codeaurora.org>
> 
> Some client devices want to directly map the IOMMU themselves instead
> of using the DMA domain. Allow those devices to opt in to direct
> mapping by way of a list of compatible strings.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Jordan Crouse <jcrouse@codeaurora.org>
> Co-developed-by: Sai Prakash Ranjan <saiprakash.ranjan@codeaurora.org>
> Signed-off-by: Sai Prakash Ranjan <saiprakash.ranjan@codeaurora.org>
> ---
>   drivers/iommu/arm-smmu-qcom.c | 39 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>   drivers/iommu/arm-smmu.c      |  3 +++
>   drivers/iommu/arm-smmu.h      |  5 +++++
>   3 files changed, 47 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/iommu/arm-smmu-qcom.c b/drivers/iommu/arm-smmu-qcom.c
> index 64a4ab270ab7..ff746acd1c81 100644
> --- a/drivers/iommu/arm-smmu-qcom.c
> +++ b/drivers/iommu/arm-smmu-qcom.c
> @@ -3,6 +3,7 @@
>    * Copyright (c) 2019, The Linux Foundation. All rights reserved.
>    */
>   
> +#include <linux/of_device.h>
>   #include <linux/qcom_scm.h>
>   
>   #include "arm-smmu.h"
> @@ -11,6 +12,43 @@ struct qcom_smmu {
>   	struct arm_smmu_device smmu;
>   };
>   
> +static const struct arm_smmu_client_match_data qcom_adreno = {
> +	.direct_mapping = true,
> +};
> +
> +static const struct arm_smmu_client_match_data qcom_mdss = {
> +	.direct_mapping = true,
> +};

Might it make sense to group these by the desired SMMU behaviour rather 
than (apparently) what kind of device the client happens to be, which 
seems like a completely arbitrary distinction from the SMMU driver's PoV?

> +
> +static const struct of_device_id qcom_smmu_client_of_match[] = {
> +	{ .compatible = "qcom,adreno", .data = &qcom_adreno },
> +	{ .compatible = "qcom,mdp4", .data = &qcom_mdss },
> +	{ .compatible = "qcom,mdss", .data = &qcom_mdss },
> +	{ .compatible = "qcom,sc7180-mdss", .data = &qcom_mdss },
> +	{ .compatible = "qcom,sdm845-mdss", .data = &qcom_mdss },
> +	{},
> +};
> +
> +static const struct arm_smmu_client_match_data *
> +qcom_smmu_client_data(struct device *dev)
> +{
> +	const struct of_device_id *match =
> +		of_match_device(qcom_smmu_client_of_match, dev);
> +
> +	return match ? match->data : NULL;

of_device_get_match_data() is your friend.

> +}
> +
> +static int qcom_smmu_request_domain(struct device *dev)
> +{
> +	const struct arm_smmu_client_match_data *client;
> +
> +	client = qcom_smmu_client_data(dev);
> +	if (client)
> +		iommu_request_dm_for_dev(dev);
> +
> +	return 0;
> +}
> +
>   static int qcom_sdm845_smmu500_reset(struct arm_smmu_device *smmu)
>   {
>   	int ret;
> @@ -41,6 +79,7 @@ static int qcom_smmu500_reset(struct arm_smmu_device *smmu)
>   }
>   
>   static const struct arm_smmu_impl qcom_smmu_impl = {
> +	.req_domain = qcom_smmu_request_domain,
>   	.reset = qcom_smmu500_reset,
>   };
>   
> diff --git a/drivers/iommu/arm-smmu.c b/drivers/iommu/arm-smmu.c
> index 16c4b87af42b..67dd9326247a 100644
> --- a/drivers/iommu/arm-smmu.c
> +++ b/drivers/iommu/arm-smmu.c
> @@ -1448,6 +1448,9 @@ static int arm_smmu_add_device(struct device *dev)
>   	device_link_add(dev, smmu->dev,
>   			DL_FLAG_PM_RUNTIME | DL_FLAG_AUTOREMOVE_SUPPLIER);
>   
> +	if (smmu->impl && smmu->impl->req_domain)
> +		return smmu->impl->req_domain(dev);
> +

There are about 5 different patchsets flying around at the moment that 
all touch default domain allocation, so this is a fast-moving target, 
but I think where the dust should settle is with arm_smmu_ops forwarding 
.def_domain_type (or whatever it ends up as) calls to arm_smmu_impl as 
appropriate.

>   	return 0;
>   
>   out_cfg_free:
> diff --git a/drivers/iommu/arm-smmu.h b/drivers/iommu/arm-smmu.h
> index 8d1cd54d82a6..059dc9c39f64 100644
> --- a/drivers/iommu/arm-smmu.h
> +++ b/drivers/iommu/arm-smmu.h
> @@ -244,6 +244,10 @@ enum arm_smmu_arch_version {
>   	ARM_SMMU_V2,
>   };
>   
> +struct arm_smmu_client_match_data {
> +	bool direct_mapping;
> +};

Does this need to be public? I don't see the other users...

Robin.

> +
>   enum arm_smmu_implementation {
>   	GENERIC_SMMU,
>   	ARM_MMU500,
> @@ -386,6 +390,7 @@ struct arm_smmu_impl {
>   	int (*init_context)(struct arm_smmu_domain *smmu_domain);
>   	void (*tlb_sync)(struct arm_smmu_device *smmu, int page, int sync,
>   			 int status);
> +	int (*req_domain)(struct device *dev);
>   };
>   
>   static inline void __iomem *arm_smmu_page(struct arm_smmu_device *smmu, int n)
> 

Re: [PATCH 2/2] iommu/arm-smmu: Allow client devices to select direct mapping

[Sai Prakash Ranjan]

Hi Robin,

On 2020-04-16 19:28, Robin Murphy wrote:
> On 2020-01-22 11:48 am, Sai Prakash Ranjan wrote:
>> From: Jordan Crouse <jcrouse@codeaurora.org>
>> 
>> Some client devices want to directly map the IOMMU themselves instead
>> of using the DMA domain. Allow those devices to opt in to direct
>> mapping by way of a list of compatible strings.
>> 
>> Signed-off-by: Jordan Crouse <jcrouse@codeaurora.org>
>> Co-developed-by: Sai Prakash Ranjan <saiprakash.ranjan@codeaurora.org>
>> Signed-off-by: Sai Prakash Ranjan <saiprakash.ranjan@codeaurora.org>
>> ---
>>   drivers/iommu/arm-smmu-qcom.c | 39 
>> +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>   drivers/iommu/arm-smmu.c      |  3 +++
>>   drivers/iommu/arm-smmu.h      |  5 +++++
>>   3 files changed, 47 insertions(+)
>> 
>> diff --git a/drivers/iommu/arm-smmu-qcom.c 
>> b/drivers/iommu/arm-smmu-qcom.c
>> index 64a4ab270ab7..ff746acd1c81 100644
>> --- a/drivers/iommu/arm-smmu-qcom.c
>> +++ b/drivers/iommu/arm-smmu-qcom.c
>> @@ -3,6 +3,7 @@
>>    * Copyright (c) 2019, The Linux Foundation. All rights reserved.
>>    */
>>   +#include <linux/of_device.h>
>>   #include <linux/qcom_scm.h>
>>     #include "arm-smmu.h"
>> @@ -11,6 +12,43 @@ struct qcom_smmu {
>>   	struct arm_smmu_device smmu;
>>   };
>>   +static const struct arm_smmu_client_match_data qcom_adreno = {
>> +	.direct_mapping = true,
>> +};
>> +
>> +static const struct arm_smmu_client_match_data qcom_mdss = {
>> +	.direct_mapping = true,
>> +};
> 
> Might it make sense to group these by the desired SMMU behaviour
> rather than (apparently) what kind of device the client happens to be,
> which seems like a completely arbitrary distinction from the SMMU
> driver's PoV?
> 

Sorry, I did not get the "grouping by the desired SMMU behaviour" thing.
Could you please give some more details?

>> +
>> +static const struct of_device_id qcom_smmu_client_of_match[] = {
>> +	{ .compatible = "qcom,adreno", .data = &qcom_adreno },
>> +	{ .compatible = "qcom,mdp4", .data = &qcom_mdss },
>> +	{ .compatible = "qcom,mdss", .data = &qcom_mdss },
>> +	{ .compatible = "qcom,sc7180-mdss", .data = &qcom_mdss },
>> +	{ .compatible = "qcom,sdm845-mdss", .data = &qcom_mdss },
>> +	{},
>> +};
>> +
>> +static const struct arm_smmu_client_match_data *
>> +qcom_smmu_client_data(struct device *dev)
>> +{
>> +	const struct of_device_id *match =
>> +		of_match_device(qcom_smmu_client_of_match, dev);
>> +
>> +	return match ? match->data : NULL;
> 
> of_device_get_match_data() is your friend.
> 

Ok will use it.

>> +}
>> +
>> +static int qcom_smmu_request_domain(struct device *dev)
>> +{
>> +	const struct arm_smmu_client_match_data *client;
>> +
>> +	client = qcom_smmu_client_data(dev);
>> +	if (client)
>> +		iommu_request_dm_for_dev(dev);
>> +
>> +	return 0;
>> +}
>> +
>>   static int qcom_sdm845_smmu500_reset(struct arm_smmu_device *smmu)
>>   {
>>   	int ret;
>> @@ -41,6 +79,7 @@ static int qcom_smmu500_reset(struct arm_smmu_device 
>> *smmu)
>>   }
>>     static const struct arm_smmu_impl qcom_smmu_impl = {
>> +	.req_domain = qcom_smmu_request_domain,
>>   	.reset = qcom_smmu500_reset,
>>   };
>>   diff --git a/drivers/iommu/arm-smmu.c b/drivers/iommu/arm-smmu.c
>> index 16c4b87af42b..67dd9326247a 100644
>> --- a/drivers/iommu/arm-smmu.c
>> +++ b/drivers/iommu/arm-smmu.c
>> @@ -1448,6 +1448,9 @@ static int arm_smmu_add_device(struct device 
>> *dev)
>>   	device_link_add(dev, smmu->dev,
>>   			DL_FLAG_PM_RUNTIME | DL_FLAG_AUTOREMOVE_SUPPLIER);
>>   +	if (smmu->impl && smmu->impl->req_domain)
>> +		return smmu->impl->req_domain(dev);
>> +
> 
> There are about 5 different patchsets flying around at the moment that
> all touch default domain allocation, so this is a fast-moving target,
> but I think where the dust should settle is with arm_smmu_ops
> forwarding .def_domain_type (or whatever it ends up as) calls to
> arm_smmu_impl as appropriate.
> 

I'll wait till the dust settles down and then post the next version.

>>   	return 0;
>>     out_cfg_free:
>> diff --git a/drivers/iommu/arm-smmu.h b/drivers/iommu/arm-smmu.h
>> index 8d1cd54d82a6..059dc9c39f64 100644
>> --- a/drivers/iommu/arm-smmu.h
>> +++ b/drivers/iommu/arm-smmu.h
>> @@ -244,6 +244,10 @@ enum arm_smmu_arch_version {
>>   	ARM_SMMU_V2,
>>   };
>>   +struct arm_smmu_client_match_data {
>> +	bool direct_mapping;
>> +};
> 
> Does this need to be public? I don't see the other users...
> 

Will move this out.

Thanks,
Sai

-- 
QUALCOMM INDIA, on behalf of Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a 
member
of Code Aurora Forum, hosted by The Linux Foundation

Re: [PATCH 2/2] iommu/arm-smmu: Allow client devices to select direct mapping

[Robin Murphy]

On 2020-04-16 5:23 pm, Sai Prakash Ranjan wrote:
> Hi Robin,
> 
> On 2020-04-16 19:28, Robin Murphy wrote:
>> On 2020-01-22 11:48 am, Sai Prakash Ranjan wrote:
>>> From: Jordan Crouse <jcrouse@codeaurora.org>
>>>
>>> Some client devices want to directly map the IOMMU themselves instead
>>> of using the DMA domain. Allow those devices to opt in to direct
>>> mapping by way of a list of compatible strings.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Jordan Crouse <jcrouse@codeaurora.org>
>>> Co-developed-by: Sai Prakash Ranjan <saiprakash.ranjan@codeaurora.org>
>>> Signed-off-by: Sai Prakash Ranjan <saiprakash.ranjan@codeaurora.org>
>>> ---
>>>   drivers/iommu/arm-smmu-qcom.c | 39 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>>   drivers/iommu/arm-smmu.c      |  3 +++
>>>   drivers/iommu/arm-smmu.h      |  5 +++++
>>>   3 files changed, 47 insertions(+)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/drivers/iommu/arm-smmu-qcom.c 
>>> b/drivers/iommu/arm-smmu-qcom.c
>>> index 64a4ab270ab7..ff746acd1c81 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/iommu/arm-smmu-qcom.c
>>> +++ b/drivers/iommu/arm-smmu-qcom.c
>>> @@ -3,6 +3,7 @@
>>>    * Copyright (c) 2019, The Linux Foundation. All rights reserved.
>>>    */
>>>   +#include <linux/of_device.h>
>>>   #include <linux/qcom_scm.h>
>>>     #include "arm-smmu.h"
>>> @@ -11,6 +12,43 @@ struct qcom_smmu {
>>>       struct arm_smmu_device smmu;
>>>   };
>>>   +static const struct arm_smmu_client_match_data qcom_adreno = {
>>> +    .direct_mapping = true,
>>> +};
>>> +
>>> +static const struct arm_smmu_client_match_data qcom_mdss = {
>>> +    .direct_mapping = true,
>>> +};
>>
>> Might it make sense to group these by the desired SMMU behaviour
>> rather than (apparently) what kind of device the client happens to be,
>> which seems like a completely arbitrary distinction from the SMMU
>> driver's PoV?
>>
> 
> Sorry, I did not get the "grouping by the desired SMMU behaviour" thing.
> Could you please give some more details?

I mean this pattern:

device_a_data {
	.thing = this;
}

device_b_data {
	.thing = this;
}

device_c_data {
	.thing = that;
}

match[] = {
	{ .compatible = "A", .data = &device_a_data },
	{ .compatible = "B", .data = &device_b_data },
	{ .compatible = "C", .data = &device_c_data },
};

...vs. this pattern:

do_this {
	.thing = this;
}

do_that {
	.thing = that;
}

match[] = {
	{ .compatible = "A", .data = &do_this },
	{ .compatible = "B", .data = &do_this },
	{ .compatible = "C", .data = &do_that },
};

 From the perspective of the thing doing the thing, grouping the data by 
device is meaningless if all that matters is whether to do this or that. 
The second pattern expresses that more naturally.

Of course if every device turns out to need a unique combination of 
several behaviours, then there ends up being no practical difference 
except that it's probably easier to come up with nice names under the 
first pattern. I guess it's up to how you see this developing in future; 
whether you're likely to need fine-grained per-device control, or don't 
expect it to go much beyond domain type.

Robin.

Re: [PATCH 2/2] iommu/arm-smmu: Allow client devices to select direct mapping

[Sai Prakash Ranjan]

Hi Robin,

On 2020-04-16 22:47, Robin Murphy wrote:
> On 2020-04-16 5:23 pm, Sai Prakash Ranjan wrote:
>> Hi Robin,
>> 
>> On 2020-04-16 19:28, Robin Murphy wrote:
>>> On 2020-01-22 11:48 am, Sai Prakash Ranjan wrote:
>>>> From: Jordan Crouse <jcrouse@codeaurora.org>
>>>> 
>>>> Some client devices want to directly map the IOMMU themselves 
>>>> instead
>>>> of using the DMA domain. Allow those devices to opt in to direct
>>>> mapping by way of a list of compatible strings.
>>>> 
>>>> Signed-off-by: Jordan Crouse <jcrouse@codeaurora.org>
>>>> Co-developed-by: Sai Prakash Ranjan 
>>>> <saiprakash.ranjan@codeaurora.org>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Sai Prakash Ranjan <saiprakash.ranjan@codeaurora.org>
>>>> ---
>>>>   drivers/iommu/arm-smmu-qcom.c | 39 
>>>> +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>>>   drivers/iommu/arm-smmu.c      |  3 +++
>>>>   drivers/iommu/arm-smmu.h      |  5 +++++
>>>>   3 files changed, 47 insertions(+)
>>>> 
>>>> diff --git a/drivers/iommu/arm-smmu-qcom.c 
>>>> b/drivers/iommu/arm-smmu-qcom.c
>>>> index 64a4ab270ab7..ff746acd1c81 100644
>>>> --- a/drivers/iommu/arm-smmu-qcom.c
>>>> +++ b/drivers/iommu/arm-smmu-qcom.c
>>>> @@ -3,6 +3,7 @@
>>>>    * Copyright (c) 2019, The Linux Foundation. All rights reserved.
>>>>    */
>>>>   +#include <linux/of_device.h>
>>>>   #include <linux/qcom_scm.h>
>>>>     #include "arm-smmu.h"
>>>> @@ -11,6 +12,43 @@ struct qcom_smmu {
>>>>       struct arm_smmu_device smmu;
>>>>   };
>>>>   +static const struct arm_smmu_client_match_data qcom_adreno = {
>>>> +    .direct_mapping = true,
>>>> +};
>>>> +
>>>> +static const struct arm_smmu_client_match_data qcom_mdss = {
>>>> +    .direct_mapping = true,
>>>> +};
>>> 
>>> Might it make sense to group these by the desired SMMU behaviour
>>> rather than (apparently) what kind of device the client happens to 
>>> be,
>>> which seems like a completely arbitrary distinction from the SMMU
>>> driver's PoV?
>>> 
>> 
>> Sorry, I did not get the "grouping by the desired SMMU behaviour" 
>> thing.
>> Could you please give some more details?
> 
> I mean this pattern:
> 
> device_a_data {
> 	.thing = this;
> }
> 
> device_b_data {
> 	.thing = this;
> }
> 
> device_c_data {
> 	.thing = that;
> }
> 
> match[] = {
> 	{ .compatible = "A", .data = &device_a_data },
> 	{ .compatible = "B", .data = &device_b_data },
> 	{ .compatible = "C", .data = &device_c_data },
> };
> 
> ...vs. this pattern:
> 
> do_this {
> 	.thing = this;
> }
> 
> do_that {
> 	.thing = that;
> }
> 
> match[] = {
> 	{ .compatible = "A", .data = &do_this },
> 	{ .compatible = "B", .data = &do_this },
> 	{ .compatible = "C", .data = &do_that },
> };
> 
> From the perspective of the thing doing the thing, grouping the data
> by device is meaningless if all that matters is whether to do this or
> that. The second pattern expresses that more naturally.
> 
> Of course if every device turns out to need a unique combination of
> several behaviours, then there ends up being no practical difference
> except that it's probably easier to come up with nice names under the
> first pattern. I guess it's up to how you see this developing in
> future; whether you're likely to need fine-grained per-device control,
> or don't expect it to go much beyond domain type.
> 

Thanks for explaining *this thing* :)
I will update the patch to follow the 2nd pattern as it makes more sense
to do_this or do_that directly. I'm not expecting anything other than
domain type atleast for now but hey we can always add the functionality
if the need arises.

Thanks,
Sai

-- 
QUALCOMM INDIA, on behalf of Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a 
member
of Code Aurora Forum, hosted by The Linux Foundation

Re: [PATCH 0/2] iommu/arm-smmu: Allow client devices to select direct mapping

[Sai Prakash Ranjan]

Hello Robin, Will

On 2020-01-22 17:18, Sai Prakash Ranjan wrote:
> This series allows drm devices to set a default identity
> mapping using iommu_request_dm_for_dev(). First patch is
> a cleanup to support other SoCs to call into QCOM specific
> implementation and preparation for second patch.
> Second patch sets the default identity domain for drm devices.
> 
> Jordan Crouse (1):
>   iommu/arm-smmu: Allow client devices to select direct mapping
> 
> Sai Prakash Ranjan (1):
>   iommu: arm-smmu-impl: Convert to a generic reset implementation
> 
>  drivers/iommu/arm-smmu-impl.c |  8 +++--
>  drivers/iommu/arm-smmu-qcom.c | 55 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--
>  drivers/iommu/arm-smmu.c      |  3 ++
>  drivers/iommu/arm-smmu.h      |  5 ++++
>  4 files changed, 65 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)

Any review comments?

Thanks,
Sai

-- 
QUALCOMM INDIA, on behalf of Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a 
member
of Code Aurora Forum, hosted by The Linux Foundation

Re: [PATCH 0/2] iommu/arm-smmu: Allow client devices to select direct mapping

[Matthias Kaehlcke]

On Tue, Feb 04, 2020 at 11:12:17PM +0530, Sai Prakash Ranjan wrote:
> Hello Robin, Will
> 
> On 2020-01-22 17:18, Sai Prakash Ranjan wrote:
> > This series allows drm devices to set a default identity
> > mapping using iommu_request_dm_for_dev(). First patch is
> > a cleanup to support other SoCs to call into QCOM specific
> > implementation and preparation for second patch.
> > Second patch sets the default identity domain for drm devices.
> > 
> > Jordan Crouse (1):
> >   iommu/arm-smmu: Allow client devices to select direct mapping
> > 
> > Sai Prakash Ranjan (1):
> >   iommu: arm-smmu-impl: Convert to a generic reset implementation
> > 
> >  drivers/iommu/arm-smmu-impl.c |  8 +++--
> >  drivers/iommu/arm-smmu-qcom.c | 55 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--
> >  drivers/iommu/arm-smmu.c      |  3 ++
> >  drivers/iommu/arm-smmu.h      |  5 ++++
> >  4 files changed, 65 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
> 
> Any review comments?

Ping

What is the status of this series, is it ready to land or are any changes
needed?

Thanks

Matthias

Re: [PATCH 0/2] iommu/arm-smmu: Allow client devices to select direct mapping

[Sai Prakash Ranjan]

Hi Matthias,

On 2020-04-10 05:01, Matthias Kaehlcke wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 04, 2020 at 11:12:17PM +0530, Sai Prakash Ranjan wrote:
>> Hello Robin, Will
>> 
>> On 2020-01-22 17:18, Sai Prakash Ranjan wrote:
>> > This series allows drm devices to set a default identity
>> > mapping using iommu_request_dm_for_dev(). First patch is
>> > a cleanup to support other SoCs to call into QCOM specific
>> > implementation and preparation for second patch.
>> > Second patch sets the default identity domain for drm devices.
>> >
>> > Jordan Crouse (1):
>> >   iommu/arm-smmu: Allow client devices to select direct mapping
>> >
>> > Sai Prakash Ranjan (1):
>> >   iommu: arm-smmu-impl: Convert to a generic reset implementation
>> >
>> >  drivers/iommu/arm-smmu-impl.c |  8 +++--
>> >  drivers/iommu/arm-smmu-qcom.c | 55 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--
>> >  drivers/iommu/arm-smmu.c      |  3 ++
>> >  drivers/iommu/arm-smmu.h      |  5 ++++
>> >  4 files changed, 65 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
>> 
>> Any review comments?
> 
> Ping
> 
> What is the status of this series, is it ready to land or are any 
> changes
> needed?
> 

I am wondering the same :)

Thanks,
Sai

-- 
QUALCOMM INDIA, on behalf of Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a 
member
of Code Aurora Forum, hosted by The Linux Foundation

Re: [PATCH 0/2] iommu/arm-smmu: Allow client devices to select direct mapping

[Jordan Crouse]

On Thu, Apr 09, 2020 at 04:31:24PM -0700, Matthias Kaehlcke wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 04, 2020 at 11:12:17PM +0530, Sai Prakash Ranjan wrote:
> > Hello Robin, Will
> > 
> > On 2020-01-22 17:18, Sai Prakash Ranjan wrote:
> > > This series allows drm devices to set a default identity
> > > mapping using iommu_request_dm_for_dev(). First patch is
> > > a cleanup to support other SoCs to call into QCOM specific
> > > implementation and preparation for second patch.
> > > Second patch sets the default identity domain for drm devices.
> > > 
> > > Jordan Crouse (1):
> > >   iommu/arm-smmu: Allow client devices to select direct mapping
> > > 
> > > Sai Prakash Ranjan (1):
> > >   iommu: arm-smmu-impl: Convert to a generic reset implementation
> > > 
> > >  drivers/iommu/arm-smmu-impl.c |  8 +++--
> > >  drivers/iommu/arm-smmu-qcom.c | 55 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--
> > >  drivers/iommu/arm-smmu.c      |  3 ++
> > >  drivers/iommu/arm-smmu.h      |  5 ++++
> > >  4 files changed, 65 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
> > 
> > Any review comments?
> 
> Ping
> 
> What is the status of this series, is it ready to land or are any changes
> needed?
> 
> Thanks
> 
> Matthias

I think this is up in the air following the changes that Joerg suggested:
https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/iommu/2020-April/043017.html

Jordan
-- 
The Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum,
a Linux Foundation Collaborative Project

Re: [PATCH 0/2] iommu/arm-smmu: Allow client devices to select direct mapping

[Sai Prakash Ranjan]

Hi Joerg,

On 2020-04-13 20:42, Jordan Crouse wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 09, 2020 at 04:31:24PM -0700, Matthias Kaehlcke wrote:
>> On Tue, Feb 04, 2020 at 11:12:17PM +0530, Sai Prakash Ranjan wrote:
>> > Hello Robin, Will
>> >
>> > On 2020-01-22 17:18, Sai Prakash Ranjan wrote:
>> > > This series allows drm devices to set a default identity
>> > > mapping using iommu_request_dm_for_dev(). First patch is
>> > > a cleanup to support other SoCs to call into QCOM specific
>> > > implementation and preparation for second patch.
>> > > Second patch sets the default identity domain for drm devices.
>> > >
>> > > Jordan Crouse (1):
>> > >   iommu/arm-smmu: Allow client devices to select direct mapping
>> > >
>> > > Sai Prakash Ranjan (1):
>> > >   iommu: arm-smmu-impl: Convert to a generic reset implementation
>> > >
>> > >  drivers/iommu/arm-smmu-impl.c |  8 +++--
>> > >  drivers/iommu/arm-smmu-qcom.c | 55 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--
>> > >  drivers/iommu/arm-smmu.c      |  3 ++
>> > >  drivers/iommu/arm-smmu.h      |  5 ++++
>> > >  4 files changed, 65 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
>> >
>> > Any review comments?
>> 
>> Ping
>> 
>> What is the status of this series, is it ready to land or are any 
>> changes
>> needed?
>> 
>> Thanks
>> 
>> Matthias
> 
> I think this is up in the air following the changes that Joerg 
> suggested:
> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/iommu/2020-April/043017.html
> 

1st patch for generic reset in this series is independent and can be 
merged.
But seems like requesting direct mapping fails with the joerg's patch 
series.

Thanks,
Sai

-- 
QUALCOMM INDIA, on behalf of Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a 
member
of Code Aurora Forum, hosted by The Linux Foundation