linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: will.deacon@arm.com (Will Deacon)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: RFC: extend IOMMU attributes
Date: Thu, 18 Feb 2016 16:21:45 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20160218162145.GB16883@arm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <HE1PR04MB1641F22E38710B68F4ED891F8DAF0@HE1PR04MB1641.eurprd04.prod.outlook.com>

Hi Stuart,

On Thu, Feb 18, 2016 at 04:16:26PM +0000, Stuart Yoder wrote:
> We are implementing support for some specialized NXP SoC network
> devices and have the desire to extend the mapping attributes beyond
> those currently in iommu.h. (I see there is a recent proposal to
> add an IOMMU_MMIO flag)
> 
> What we have right now in Linux is a least-common-denominator set of
> attributes, while for the ARM SMMU there is a much richer set of
> attributes that seem useful to support. Specifically, we have one
> SoC device we're dealing with right now that is the target of DMA
> that functionally requires a "cacheable, non-shareable" attribute
> in its SMMU mapping.
> 
> In addition, there are many other attributes such as r/w allocate
> hints, transient hints, write-back/write-thru, etc in the SMMU.
> 
> We wanted to see what your thinking is with respect to the
> direction the Linux IOMMU layer will head over the longer term with
> respect to attributes.
> 
> Is there anything problematic with continuing to grow the
> attributes in iommu.h?...e.g.:
> 
>  #define IOMMU_READ            (1 << 0)
>  #define IOMMU_WRITE           (1 << 1)
> -#define IOMMU_CACHE           (1 << 2) /* DMA cache coherency */
> +#define IOMMU_CACHE_COHERENT  (1 << 2) /* cacheable and coherent */
>  #define IOMMU_NOEXEC          (1 << 3)
>  #define IOMMU_MMIO            (1 << 4) /* e.g. things like MSI doorbells */
> +#define IOMMU_CACHEABLE       (1 << 5) /* cacheable, not coherent */

What does that even mean?

> +#define IOMMU_CACHE_ALLOCATE  (1 << 6) /* hint to allocate in the cache */
> 
> Also, are we willing to let somewhat architecture specific flags
> onto that list?  For, example the ARM 'transient' hint.

If we're going to support fine-grained attribute control, I think it needs
to be done in a page-table specific manner. That is, io-pgtable-arm could
provide those attribute controls which feature in the ARMv8 architecture...

...but that brings me onto my next question: Who on Earth is actually
going to provide these attributes to the IOMMU API?

There seems to be a missing piece.

Will

  reply	other threads:[~2016-02-18 16:21 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2016-02-18 16:16 RFC: extend IOMMU attributes Stuart Yoder
2016-02-18 16:21 ` Will Deacon [this message]
2016-02-18 19:33   ` Stuart Yoder
2016-02-25 14:38 ` joro at 8bytes.org
2016-02-25 15:00   ` Will Deacon

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=20160218162145.GB16883@arm.com \
    --to=will.deacon@arm.com \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).