From: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@nvidia.com>
To: Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>
Cc: Michael Shavit <mshavit@google.com>,
iommu@lists.linux.dev, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, robin.murphy@arm.com,
nicolinc@nvidia.com, jean-philippe@linaro.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 2/9] iommu/arm-smmu-v3: Replace s1_cfg with cdtab_cfg
Date: Thu, 10 Aug 2023 09:04:35 -0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <ZNTSU1Jm6OsauygC@nvidia.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20230810094323.GC5365@willie-the-truck>
On Thu, Aug 10, 2023 at 10:43:33AM +0100, Will Deacon wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 10, 2023 at 05:33:53PM +0800, Michael Shavit wrote:
> > > > > Sounds a lot like the existing s1fmt field. Can we keep it?
> > > >
> > > > If you are OK with the dead code, I don't object. But let's put it in
> > > > the struct arm_smmu_ctx_desc_cfg.
> > >
> > > Ok, we have a deal!
> >
> > What dead code? Is the deal here that we keep the field, but still
> > infer the value to write from (cd_table->l1_desc == null) in
> > arm_smmu_write_strtab_ent??
>
> Keep the field and write it directly when populating the ste (i.e. don't
> infer anything), but the field moves into 'struct arm_smmu_ctx_desc_cfg'.
Yes - the 'dead code' is that we introduce storage for a field that is
always a known constant (STRTAB_STE_0_S1FMT_64K_L2).
Jason
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@nvidia.com>
To: Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>
Cc: Michael Shavit <mshavit@google.com>,
iommu@lists.linux.dev, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, robin.murphy@arm.com,
nicolinc@nvidia.com, jean-philippe@linaro.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 2/9] iommu/arm-smmu-v3: Replace s1_cfg with cdtab_cfg
Date: Thu, 10 Aug 2023 09:04:35 -0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <ZNTSU1Jm6OsauygC@nvidia.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20230810094323.GC5365@willie-the-truck>
On Thu, Aug 10, 2023 at 10:43:33AM +0100, Will Deacon wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 10, 2023 at 05:33:53PM +0800, Michael Shavit wrote:
> > > > > Sounds a lot like the existing s1fmt field. Can we keep it?
> > > >
> > > > If you are OK with the dead code, I don't object. But let's put it in
> > > > the struct arm_smmu_ctx_desc_cfg.
> > >
> > > Ok, we have a deal!
> >
> > What dead code? Is the deal here that we keep the field, but still
> > infer the value to write from (cd_table->l1_desc == null) in
> > arm_smmu_write_strtab_ent??
>
> Keep the field and write it directly when populating the ste (i.e. don't
> infer anything), but the field moves into 'struct arm_smmu_ctx_desc_cfg'.
Yes - the 'dead code' is that we introduce storage for a field that is
always a known constant (STRTAB_STE_0_S1FMT_64K_L2).
Jason
_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-08-10 12:04 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 90+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-08-08 17:11 [PATCH v5 0/9] Refactor the SMMU's CD table ownership Michael Shavit
2023-08-08 17:11 ` Michael Shavit
2023-08-08 17:11 ` [PATCH v5 1/9] iommu/arm-smmu-v3: Move ctx_desc out of s1_cfg Michael Shavit
2023-08-08 17:11 ` Michael Shavit
2023-08-08 17:11 ` [PATCH v5 2/9] iommu/arm-smmu-v3: Replace s1_cfg with cdtab_cfg Michael Shavit
2023-08-08 17:11 ` Michael Shavit
2023-08-09 13:49 ` Will Deacon
2023-08-09 13:49 ` Will Deacon
2023-08-09 13:59 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2023-08-09 13:59 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2023-08-09 14:55 ` Will Deacon
2023-08-09 14:55 ` Will Deacon
2023-08-09 15:08 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2023-08-09 15:08 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2023-08-09 16:22 ` Will Deacon
2023-08-09 16:22 ` Will Deacon
2023-08-09 16:26 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2023-08-09 16:26 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2023-08-09 16:27 ` Will Deacon
2023-08-09 16:27 ` Will Deacon
2023-08-10 9:33 ` Michael Shavit
2023-08-10 9:33 ` Michael Shavit
2023-08-10 9:43 ` Will Deacon
2023-08-10 9:43 ` Will Deacon
2023-08-10 12:04 ` Jason Gunthorpe [this message]
2023-08-10 12:04 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2023-08-10 17:15 ` Michael Shavit
2023-08-10 17:15 ` Michael Shavit
2023-08-10 17:32 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2023-08-10 17:32 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2023-08-08 17:11 ` [PATCH v5 3/9] iommu/arm-smmu-v3: Encapsulate ctx_desc_cfg init in alloc_cd_tables Michael Shavit
2023-08-08 17:11 ` Michael Shavit
2023-08-08 17:12 ` [PATCH v5 4/9] iommu/arm-smmu-v3: move stall_enabled to the cd table Michael Shavit
2023-08-08 17:12 ` Michael Shavit
2023-08-08 17:12 ` [PATCH v5 5/9] iommu/arm-smmu-v3: Refactor write_ctx_desc Michael Shavit
2023-08-08 17:12 ` Michael Shavit
2023-08-09 13:50 ` Will Deacon
2023-08-09 13:50 ` Will Deacon
2023-08-10 9:15 ` Michael Shavit
2023-08-10 9:15 ` Michael Shavit
2023-08-10 14:40 ` Will Deacon
2023-08-10 14:40 ` Will Deacon
2023-08-10 15:39 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2023-08-10 15:39 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2023-08-15 5:20 ` Michael Shavit
2023-08-15 5:20 ` Michael Shavit
2023-08-15 11:22 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2023-08-15 11:22 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2023-08-15 12:03 ` Michael Shavit
2023-08-15 12:03 ` Michael Shavit
2023-08-15 12:30 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2023-08-15 12:30 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2023-08-15 12:36 ` Michael Shavit
2023-08-15 12:36 ` Michael Shavit
2023-08-15 12:56 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2023-08-15 12:56 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2023-08-15 5:04 ` Michael Shavit
2023-08-15 5:04 ` Michael Shavit
2023-08-15 10:19 ` Will Deacon
2023-08-15 10:19 ` Will Deacon
2023-08-15 11:40 ` Michael Shavit
2023-08-15 11:40 ` Michael Shavit
2023-08-08 17:12 ` [PATCH v5 6/9] iommu/arm-smmu-v3: Move CD table to arm_smmu_master Michael Shavit
2023-08-08 17:12 ` Michael Shavit
2023-08-09 13:50 ` Will Deacon
2023-08-09 13:50 ` Will Deacon
2023-08-10 9:23 ` Michael Shavit
2023-08-10 9:23 ` Michael Shavit
2023-08-10 14:38 ` Will Deacon
2023-08-10 14:38 ` Will Deacon
2023-08-10 9:45 ` Michael Shavit
2023-08-10 9:45 ` Michael Shavit
2023-08-10 14:34 ` Will Deacon
2023-08-10 14:34 ` Will Deacon
2023-08-10 14:56 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2023-08-10 14:56 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2023-08-15 12:10 ` Michael Shavit
2023-08-15 12:10 ` Michael Shavit
2023-08-08 17:12 ` [PATCH v5 7/9] iommu/arm-smmu-v3: Cleanup arm_smmu_domain_finalise Michael Shavit
2023-08-08 17:12 ` Michael Shavit
2023-08-08 17:12 ` [PATCH v5 8/9] iommu/arm-smmu-v3: Skip cd sync if CD table isn't active Michael Shavit
2023-08-08 17:12 ` Michael Shavit
2023-08-09 13:50 ` Will Deacon
2023-08-09 13:50 ` Will Deacon
2023-08-10 8:34 ` Michael Shavit
2023-08-10 8:34 ` Michael Shavit
2023-08-10 16:27 ` Will Deacon
2023-08-10 16:27 ` Will Deacon
2023-08-08 17:12 ` [PATCH v5 9/9] iommu/arm-smmu-v3: Rename cdcfg to cd_table Michael Shavit
2023-08-08 17:12 ` Michael Shavit
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=ZNTSU1Jm6OsauygC@nvidia.com \
--to=jgg@nvidia.com \
--cc=iommu@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=jean-philippe@linaro.org \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mshavit@google.com \
--cc=nicolinc@nvidia.com \
--cc=robin.murphy@arm.com \
--cc=will@kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.