From: Nicolin Chen <nicoleotsuka@gmail.com>
To: Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>
Cc: will.deacon@arm.com, robin.murphy@arm.com,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: Re: Why doesn't arm-smmu (v2) driver take VA_BITS into consideration?
Date: Fri, 28 Jun 2019 01:10:07 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20190628081006.GA6628@Asurada> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20190627102640.2pzgiro3gq3ont5s@willie-the-truck>
Hi Will,
On Thu, Jun 27, 2019 at 11:26:40AM +0100, Will Deacon wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 26, 2019 at 05:19:33PM -0700, Nicolin Chen wrote:
> > I am using an Soc that contains arm-smmu v2 engines. I found that
> > the arm-smmu driver reads GR_ID2 register and defines ias and oas
> > of each domain based on the corresponding fields of that GR_ID2.
> >
> > Using my platform for example, it gets 48-bit for all ias and oas,
> > being translated from those fields so I got these 2 stages:
> > Stage-1: 48-bit VA -> 48-bit IPA
> > Stage-2: 48-bit IPA -> 48-bit PA
> >
> > Then the code does below to configure aperture_end to 48-bit:
> > 914 domain->geometry.aperture_end = (1UL << ias) - 1;
> >
> > However, my system configures VA_BITS to 39. So aperture_end==48
> > is a mismatch comparing to VA_BITS_39. Although the aperture_end
> > is supposed to cap IOVA allocation, this 48-bit cap won't really
> > do the job at all.
>
> What actually goes wrong, though? IOVAs should only be handed over to
> devices, so VA_BITS doesn't strictly matter. It's the DMA masks that are
> important.
Ah..that's true. I think I misunderstood one of my situations here.
> > I saw that arm-smmu-v3 driver takes VA_BITS into consideration:
> > 1765 switch (smmu_domain->stage) {
> > 1766 case ARM_SMMU_DOMAIN_S1:
> > 1767 ias = (smmu->features & ARM_SMMU_FEAT_VAX) ?
> > 1768 ias = min_t(unsigned long, ias, VA_BITS);
> >
> > So I am wondering if it is intentionally designed so by ignoring
> > VA_BITS? Would you please help me understand this a bit?
>
> I think it's simply that SMMUv3 doesn't provide an ID field to tell you
> what to use, so we chose to go with VA_BITS since it's what we're using
> on the CPU.
I see. Thanks for explaining!
Nicolin
_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel
prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-06-28 8:10 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-06-27 0:19 Why doesn't arm-smmu (v2) driver take VA_BITS into consideration? Nicolin Chen
2019-06-27 10:26 ` Will Deacon
2019-06-28 8:10 ` Nicolin Chen [this message]
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=20190628081006.GA6628@Asurada \
--to=nicoleotsuka@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=robin.murphy@arm.com \
--cc=will.deacon@arm.com \
--cc=will@kernel.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).