From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: will.deacon@arm.com (Will Deacon)
Date: Mon, 20 May 2013 11:18:41 +0100
Subject: [PATCH v2] documentation: iommu: add description of ARM System
 MMU binding
In-Reply-To: <20130517201639.GL10369@alberich>
References: <1365789727-5371-1-git-send-email-will.deacon@arm.com>
 <20130513095020.GB10369@alberich>
 <20130513095846.GC29814@mudshark.cambridge.arm.com>
 <20130513104147.GF10369@alberich> <20130517201639.GL10369@alberich>
Message-ID: <20130520101841.GK31359@mudshark.cambridge.arm.com>
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org

Hi Andreas,

On Fri, May 17, 2013 at 09:16:39PM +0100, Andreas Herrmann wrote:
> On Mon, May 13, 2013 at 12:41:47PM +0200, Andreas Herrmann wrote:
> > On Mon, May 13, 2013 at 05:58:46AM -0400, Will Deacon wrote:
> > > Again, you also need to tie in topology information if you go down this
> > > route.
> 
> I still don't like the approach of having two independend lists that
> must be in sync to associate a master with its stream-ids.
> 
> Why? Say you have 8 masters for an SMMU with 1 or 2 stream-ids each:
> 
>      	 smmu {
> 		...
>                 mmu-masters = <&dma0>, <&dma0>, <&dma1>, <&dma1>,
> 			      <&dma2>, <&dma2>, <&dma4>, <&dma4>,
> 			      <&dma5>, <&dma6>, <&dma7>, <&dma8>;
>                 stream-ids =	<0>, <1>, <2>, <3>,
> 				<4>, <5>, <6>, <7>,
> 		                <8>, <9>, <0xa>, <0xb>;
> 	}
> 
> Couldn't we use of_phandle_args for this purpose? So your example
> 
> +        smmu {
> 		 ...
> +                mmu-masters = <&dma0>,
> +                              <&dma0>,
> +                              <&dma1>;
> +                stream-ids  = <0xd01d>,
> +                              <0xd01e>,
> +                              <0xd11c>;
> +        };
> 
> would look like
> 
> 	dma0 {
> 		...
> 		#stream-id-cells = <2>
> 		...
> 	}
> 
> 	dma1 {
> 		...
> 		#stream-id-cells = <1>
> 		...
> 	}
> 
>         smmu {
> 		...
> 		mmu-masters = <&dma0 0xd01d 0xd01e
> 			       &dma1 0xd11c>,
>        };
> 
> and my example would be converted to
> 
> 	smmu {
> 		...
>                 mmu-masters = <&dma0 0 1 &dma1 2 3 &dma2 4 5
> 			       &dma4 6 7 &dma5 8 &dma6 9
> 			       &dma7 0xa &dma8 0xb>
> 		...
> 	}

That also looks fine to me, although I'd like to write the parsing code in
my driver before I commit to anything!

> Of course usage of of_phandle_args would restrict the number of
> stream-ids per master to 8 (which is currently used as
> MAX_PHANDLE_ARGS). But I don't think that this is a restriction in
> practice or do you expect to have more than 8 stream-ids per master
> (ie. per struct device in Linux)?

Actually, I think that could be a problem. It doesn't sound unlikely that
multi-channel DMA controllers could have:

	- Separate instruction fetch streamid per channel
	- Separate read/write streamids per channel

so 8 does sound a bit small to me. How difficult would it be to bump that
number in the future if we needed to?

Will