From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: andreas.herrmann@calxeda.com (Andreas Herrmann) Date: Mon, 30 Sep 2013 19:17:16 +0200 Subject: [PATCH] iommu/arm-smmu: Clear global and context bank fault status registers In-Reply-To: <20130930160615.GG26036@mudshark.cambridge.arm.com> References: <1380234982-1677-1-git-send-email-andreas.herrmann@calxeda.com> <1380234982-1677-6-git-send-email-andreas.herrmann@calxeda.com> <20130927085255.GC8319@mudshark.cambridge.arm.com> <20130930135401.GV3315@alberich> <20130930135621.GW3315@alberich> <20130930160615.GG26036@mudshark.cambridge.arm.com> Message-ID: <20130930171716.GX3315@alberich> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On Mon, Sep 30, 2013 at 12:06:15PM -0400, Will Deacon wrote: > On Mon, Sep 30, 2013 at 02:56:21PM +0100, Andreas Herrmann wrote: > > > > After reset these registers have unknown values. > > This might cause problems when evaluating SMMU_GFSR and/or SMMU_CB_FSR > > in handlers for combined interrupts. > > > > Signed-off-by: Andreas Herrmann > > --- > > drivers/iommu/arm-smmu.c | 27 ++++++++++++++++++++------- > > 1 file changed, 20 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/drivers/iommu/arm-smmu.c b/drivers/iommu/arm-smmu.c > > index 579b6f8..cbbf597 100644 > > --- a/drivers/iommu/arm-smmu.c > > +++ b/drivers/iommu/arm-smmu.c > > @@ -631,6 +631,12 @@ static irqreturn_t arm_smmu_global_fault(int irq, void *dev) > > return IRQ_HANDLED; > > } > > > > +static void arm_smmu_clear_cb_fsr(struct arm_smmu_device *smmu, u8 cbndx) > > +{ > > + void __iomem *cb_base = ARM_SMMU_CB_BASE(smmu) + ARM_SMMU_CB(smmu, cbndx); > > + writel_relaxed(FSR_FAULT, cb_base + ARM_SMMU_CB_FSR); > > +} > > Hmm, why not just stick this in arm_smmu_init_context_bank... Because we should clear the FSR before we call request_irq. Otherwise we might handle interrupts although the context bank is not enabled. Moving request_irq after arm_smmu_init_context_bank is not optimal either. (We should have configured the context interrupt before translation is enabled. Otherwise it's possible to miss a fault.) > > static void arm_smmu_init_context_bank(struct arm_smmu_domain *smmu_domain) > > { > > u32 reg; > > @@ -838,6 +844,7 @@ static int arm_smmu_init_domain_context(struct iommu_domain *domain, > > root_cfg->irptndx = root_cfg->cbndx; > > } > > > > + arm_smmu_clear_cb_fsr(smmu, root_cfg->cbndx); > > ... then move that function call here instead of where it currently is? See above. > > irq = smmu->irqs[smmu->num_global_irqs + root_cfg->irptndx]; > > ret = request_irq(irq, arm_smmu_context_fault, IRQF_SHARED, > > "arm-smmu-context-fault", domain); > > @@ -1564,7 +1571,11 @@ static void arm_smmu_device_reset(struct arm_smmu_device *smmu) > > void __iomem *gr0_base = ARM_SMMU_GR0(smmu); > > void __iomem *sctlr_base = ARM_SMMU_CB_BASE(smmu) + ARM_SMMU_CB_SCTLR; > > int i = 0; > > - u32 scr0 = readl_relaxed(gr0_base + ARM_SMMU_GR0_sCR0); > > + u32 val; > > I guess we have to dilute the meaning of the variable, but perhaps `reg' is > slightly more indicative than `val'? Will change that. > Do you plan to post all your patches as a new series (it's hard to keep > track of what to pick)? Yes. Andreas