From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-17.3 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,INCLUDES_CR_TRAILER, INCLUDES_PATCH,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,NICE_REPLY_A,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS, USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B34F9C433B4 for ; Wed, 28 Apr 2021 13:56:50 +0000 (UTC) Received: from lists.xenproject.org (lists.xenproject.org [192.237.175.120]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 368D0613F9 for ; Wed, 28 Apr 2021 13:56:50 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 368D0613F9 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=xen.org Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=xen-devel-bounces@lists.xenproject.org Received: from list by lists.xenproject.org with outflank-mailman.119382.225834 (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1lbkgF-0001cE-02; Wed, 28 Apr 2021 13:56:43 +0000 X-Outflank-Mailman: Message body and most headers restored to incoming version Received: by outflank-mailman (output) from mailman id 119382.225834; Wed, 28 Apr 2021 13:56:42 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.xenproject.org) by lists.xenproject.org with esmtp (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1lbkgE-0001c7-TE; Wed, 28 Apr 2021 13:56:42 +0000 Received: by outflank-mailman (input) for mailman id 119382; Wed, 28 Apr 2021 13:56:41 +0000 Received: from mail.xenproject.org ([104.130.215.37]) by lists.xenproject.org with esmtp (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1lbkgD-0001bG-Pl for xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org; Wed, 28 Apr 2021 13:56:41 +0000 Received: from xenbits.xenproject.org ([104.239.192.120]) by mail.xenproject.org with esmtp (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1lbkgC-0006XB-5s; Wed, 28 Apr 2021 13:56:40 +0000 Received: from [54.239.6.188] (helo=a483e7b01a66.ant.amazon.com) by xenbits.xenproject.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.3:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1lbkgB-0005jy-ST; Wed, 28 Apr 2021 13:56:40 +0000 X-BeenThere: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org List-Id: Xen developer discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xenproject.org Precedence: list Sender: "Xen-devel" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=xen.org; s=20200302mail; h=Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-Type:In-Reply-To: MIME-Version:Date:Message-ID:From:References:Cc:To:Subject; bh=z+23nAtDHbUY6XtDN0eg5wKMgkU70ngjKlgGQv+CiUg=; b=tg1BVbf7E59GdeIW3ghPuyhEqH 4yjSCsVeKyaswNUY0hJa/p/mfmM8sw1d6Y9t3anpnuUG/T8sZGA1jEw4WWNQA/3aF/uNYhDDvtgvX XwRCDg+A8YOaqxFBCm07gWG7pqErAm1xnZSz5pKRTLo2Yo99SEkntVVm3vGUA2INiDC4=; Subject: Re: [PATCH RESEND v3 3/3] arm,smmu: add support for generic DT bindings. Implement add_device and dt_xlate. To: Stefano Stabellini , xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org Cc: Bertrand.Marquis@arm.com, Volodymyr_Babchuk@epam.com, rahul.singh@arm.com, brian.woods@xilinx.com, Stefano Stabellini References: <20210413175905.15123-3-sstabellini@kernel.org> From: Julien Grall Message-ID: Date: Wed, 28 Apr 2021 14:56:37 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.15; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.10.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20210413175905.15123-3-sstabellini@kernel.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Language: en-GB Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On 13/04/2021 18:59, Stefano Stabellini wrote: > From: Brian Woods > > Now that all arm iommu drivers support generic bindings we can remove > the workaround from iommu_add_dt_device(). Well, it was just added in a different place in patch #1. ;) I have commented about it in patch #1. > > Note that if both legacy bindings and generic bindings are present in > device tree, the legacy bindings are the ones that are used Can you oultine what guarantee that? Also what happen if some of devices are using the generic bindings while other are using the legacy one? > > Signed-off-by: Brian Woods > Signed-off-by: Stefano Stabellini > Reviewed-by: Rahul Singh > --- > xen/drivers/passthrough/arm/smmu.c | 42 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++- > xen/drivers/passthrough/device_tree.c | 17 +---------- > 2 files changed, 42 insertions(+), 17 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/xen/drivers/passthrough/arm/smmu.c b/xen/drivers/passthrough/arm/smmu.c > index f949c110ad..b564851a56 100644 > --- a/xen/drivers/passthrough/arm/smmu.c > +++ b/xen/drivers/passthrough/arm/smmu.c > @@ -254,6 +254,8 @@ struct iommu_group > atomic_t ref; > }; > > +static struct arm_smmu_device *find_smmu(const struct device *dev); > + > static struct iommu_group *iommu_group_alloc(void) > { > struct iommu_group *group = xzalloc(struct iommu_group); > @@ -442,6 +444,8 @@ static struct iommu_group *iommu_group_get(struct device *dev) > #define SMR_VALID (1U << 31) > #define SMR_MASK_SHIFT 16 > #define SMR_ID_SHIFT 0 > +#define SMR_ID_MASK 0x7fff > +#define SMR_MASK_MASK 0x7fff > > #define ARM_SMMU_GR0_S2CR(n) (0xc00 + ((n) << 2)) > #define S2CR_CBNDX_SHIFT 0 > @@ -872,6 +876,40 @@ static int register_smmu_master(struct arm_smmu_device *smmu, > fwspec); > } > > +static int arm_smmu_dt_add_device_generic(u8 devfn, struct device *dev) > +{ > + struct arm_smmu_device *smmu; > + struct iommu_fwspec *fwspec; > + > + fwspec = dev_iommu_fwspec_get(dev); > + if (fwspec == NULL) > + return -ENXIO; > + > + smmu = find_smmu(fwspec->iommu_dev); > + if (smmu == NULL) > + return -ENXIO; > + > + return arm_smmu_dt_add_device_legacy(smmu, dev, fwspec); Patch #2 seems to imply the code was reworked to have distinct path between legacy and generic. But now, you are calling the legacy code from the generic helper. This is pretty confusing, can you explain what's going on? > +} > + > +static int arm_smmu_dt_xlate_generic(struct device *dev, > + const struct dt_phandle_args *spec) This seems to be a verbatim copy from Linux. It would be good to mention it in the commit message. This would make easier to track any change. > +{ > + uint32_t mask, fwid = 0; > + > + if (spec->args_count > 0) > + fwid |= (SMR_ID_MASK & spec->args[0]) << SMR_ID_SHIFT; > + > + if (spec->args_count > 1) > + fwid |= (SMR_MASK_MASK & spec->args[1]) << SMR_MASK_SHIFT; > + else if (!of_property_read_u32(spec->np, "stream-match-mask", &mask)) > + fwid |= (SMR_MASK_MASK & mask) << SMR_MASK_SHIFT; > + > + return iommu_fwspec_add_ids(dev, > + &fwid, > + 1); NIT: This feels a bit odd to read. Can't they be defined on the same line? > +} > + > static struct arm_smmu_device *find_smmu_for_device(struct device *dev) > { > struct arm_smmu_device *smmu; > @@ -2836,6 +2874,7 @@ static void arm_smmu_iommu_domain_teardown(struct domain *d) > static const struct iommu_ops arm_smmu_iommu_ops = { > .init = arm_smmu_iommu_domain_init, > .hwdom_init = arm_smmu_iommu_hwdom_init, > + .add_device = arm_smmu_dt_add_device_generic, > .teardown = arm_smmu_iommu_domain_teardown, > .iotlb_flush = arm_smmu_iotlb_flush, > .iotlb_flush_all = arm_smmu_iotlb_flush_all, > @@ -2843,9 +2882,10 @@ static const struct iommu_ops arm_smmu_iommu_ops = { > .reassign_device = arm_smmu_reassign_dev, > .map_page = arm_iommu_map_page, > .unmap_page = arm_iommu_unmap_page, > + .dt_xlate = arm_smmu_dt_xlate_generic, > }; > > -static __init const struct arm_smmu_device *find_smmu(const struct device *dev) > +static struct arm_smmu_device *find_smmu(const struct device *dev) > { > struct arm_smmu_device *smmu; > bool found = false; > diff --git a/xen/drivers/passthrough/device_tree.c b/xen/drivers/passthrough/device_tree.c > index a51ae3c9c3..ae07f272e1 100644 > --- a/xen/drivers/passthrough/device_tree.c > +++ b/xen/drivers/passthrough/device_tree.c > @@ -162,22 +162,7 @@ int iommu_add_dt_device(struct dt_device_node *np) > * these callback implemented. > */ > if ( !ops->add_device || !ops->dt_xlate ) > - { > - /* > - * Some Device Trees may expose both legacy SMMU and generic > - * IOMMU bindings together. However, the SMMU driver is only > - * supporting the former and will protect them during the > - * initialization. So we need to skip them and not return > - * error here. > - * > - * XXX: This can be dropped when the SMMU is able to deal > - * with generic bindings. > - */ > - if ( dt_device_is_protected(np) ) > - return 0; > - else > - return -EINVAL; > - } > + return -EINVAL; > > if ( !dt_device_is_available(iommu_spec.np) ) > break; > -- Julien Grall