linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: lorenzo.pieralisi@arm.com (Lorenzo Pieralisi)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH 1/2] iommu/arm-smmu: Don't inadvertently reject multiple SMMUv3s
Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2016 14:21:46 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20161017132146.GA26341@red-moon> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <5cf1acbf9c42cc99e5cc0dacb50b7a92c3bd0feb.1476702234.git.robin.murphy@arm.com>

On Mon, Oct 17, 2016 at 12:06:20PM +0100, Robin Murphy wrote:
> We now delay installing our per-bus iommu_ops until we know an SMMU has
> successfully probed, as they don't serve much purpose beforehand, and
> doing so also avoids fights between multiple IOMMU drivers in a single
> kernel. However, the upshot of passing the return value of bus_set_iommu()
> back from our probe function is that if there happens to be more than
> one SMMUv3 device in a system, the second and subsequent probes will
> wind up returning -EBUSY to the driver core and getting torn down again.
> 
> There are essentially 3 cases in which bus_set_iommu() returns nonzero:
> 1. The bus already has iommu_ops installed
> 2. One of the add_device callbacks from the initial notifier failed
> 3. Allocating or installing the notifier itself failed
> 
> The first two are down to devices other than the SMMU in question, so
> shouldn't abort an otherwise-successful SMMU probe, whilst the third is
> indicative of the kind of catastrophic system failure which isn't going
> to get much further anyway. Consequently, there is little harm in
> ignoring the return value either way.
> 
> CC: Lorenzo Pieralisi <lorenzo.pieralisi@arm.com>
> Signed-off-by: Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@arm.com>
> ---
>  drivers/iommu/arm-smmu-v3.c | 11 ++++-------
>  1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/iommu/arm-smmu-v3.c b/drivers/iommu/arm-smmu-v3.c
> index 15c01c3cd540..74fbef384deb 100644
> --- a/drivers/iommu/arm-smmu-v3.c
> +++ b/drivers/iommu/arm-smmu-v3.c
> @@ -2637,16 +2637,13 @@ static int arm_smmu_device_dt_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
>  	of_iommu_set_ops(dev->of_node, &arm_smmu_ops);
>  #ifdef CONFIG_PCI
>  	pci_request_acs();
> -	ret = bus_set_iommu(&pci_bus_type, &arm_smmu_ops);
> -	if (ret)
> -		return ret;
> +	bus_set_iommu(&pci_bus_type, &arm_smmu_ops);
>  #endif
>  #ifdef CONFIG_ARM_AMBA
> -	ret = bus_set_iommu(&amba_bustype, &arm_smmu_ops);
> -	if (ret)
> -		return ret;
> +	bus_set_iommu(&amba_bustype, &arm_smmu_ops);
>  #endif
> -	return bus_set_iommu(&platform_bus_type, &arm_smmu_ops);
> +	bus_set_iommu(&platform_bus_type, &arm_smmu_ops);
> +	return 0;

Nit: I do not see why you would not take the same approach as
the ARM SMMUv1/v2, namely checking if ops are already set and
skip the call if that's the case.

Anyway:

Acked-by: Lorenzo Pieralisi <lorenzo.pieralisi@arm.com>

>  }
>  
>  static int arm_smmu_device_remove(struct platform_device *pdev)
> -- 
> 1.9.1
> 

  parent reply	other threads:[~2016-10-17 13:21 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2016-10-17 11:06 [PATCH 1/2] iommu/arm-smmu: Don't inadvertently reject multiple SMMUv3s Robin Murphy
2016-10-17 11:06 ` [PATCH 2/2] iommu/arm-smmu: Work around ARM DMA configuration Robin Murphy
2016-10-17 13:21 ` Lorenzo Pieralisi [this message]
2016-10-17 14:19   ` [PATCH 1/2] iommu/arm-smmu: Don't inadvertently reject multiple SMMUv3s Robin Murphy
2016-10-17 17:57     ` Lorenzo Pieralisi
2016-10-17 14:19 ` Sricharan
2016-10-19 12:49 ` Will Deacon
2016-10-21 16:20   ` Robin Murphy
2016-10-26  9:29     ` Will Deacon
2016-10-25 15:25 ` Hanjun Guo

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=20161017132146.GA26341@red-moon \
    --to=lorenzo.pieralisi@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).