[PATCH v3 2/2] acpi/iort: numa: Add numa node mapping for smmuv3 devices

[robert.richter@cavium.com (Robert Richter)]

On 04.07.17 11:07:59, Lorenzo Pieralisi wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 28, 2017 at 07:47:50PM +0200, Robert Richter wrote:
> > On 15.06.17 14:46:03, Lorenzo Pieralisi wrote:
> > > On Thu, Jun 08, 2017 at 10:14:19AM +0530, Ganapatrao Kulkarni wrote:
> > > > Add code to parse proximity domain in SMMUv3 IORT table to
> > > > set numa node mapping for smmuv3 devices.
> > > > 
> > > > Signed-off-by: Ganapatrao Kulkarni <ganapatrao.kulkarni@cavium.com>
> > > > ---
> > > >  drivers/acpi/arm64/iort.c | 28 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++--
> > > >  1 file changed, 26 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> > > 
> > > I am happy to take this but I want to know what we shall do with
> > > patch 1 and related ACPICA changes first.
> > 
> > The change is now in acpica:
> > 
> >  https://github.com/acpica/acpica/commit/8cadc4fb500e2aa52241e367c87a0f95d9760c58
> > 
> > So we could guard the code with an #ifdef until that patch is pulled
> > in via acpica tree:
> > 
> > > > diff --git a/drivers/acpi/arm64/iort.c b/drivers/acpi/arm64/iort.c
> > > > index bba2b59..e804386 100644
> > > > --- a/drivers/acpi/arm64/iort.c
> > > > +++ b/drivers/acpi/arm64/iort.c
> > > > @@ -882,6 +882,23 @@ static bool __init arm_smmu_v3_is_coherent(struct acpi_iort_node *node)
> > > >  	return smmu->flags & ACPI_IORT_SMMU_V3_COHACC_OVERRIDE;
> > > >  }
> > > >  
> > > > +/*
> > > > + * set numa proximity domain for smmuv3 device
> > > > + */
> > > > +static void  __init arm_smmu_v3_set_proximity(struct acpi_iort_node *node,
> > > > +		struct device *dev)
> > > > +{
> > 
> > #ifdef ACPI_IORT_SMMU_V3_PXM_VALID
> > 
> > > > +	struct acpi_iort_smmu_v3 *smmu;
> > > > +
> > > > +	smmu = (struct acpi_iort_smmu_v3 *)node->node_data;
> > > > +	if (smmu->flags & ACPI_IORT_SMMU_V3_PXM_VALID) {
> > > > +		set_dev_node(dev, acpi_map_pxm_to_node(smmu->pxm));
> > > > +		pr_info("SMMUV3[%llx] Mapped to Proximity domain %d\n",
> > > > +			smmu->base_address,
> > > > +			smmu->pxm);
> > > > +	}
> > 
> > #endif
> > 
> > > > +}
> > > > +
> > 
> > Could the patch be applied with this change?
> 
> Sorry I was away (and the ARM64 tree was not accepting any new code last
> week anyway), I will send the patch upstream for 4.14 (with your change
> above - or whatever ACPICA guard make it safe - since we will depend on
> ACPICA changes merge timing anyway - they won't be merged this cycle).
> 
> Bad timing, apologies, I hope it is not a burden to carry it for one
> cycle.

No problem. Good to hear this is accepted for 4.14.

Thanks,

-Robert