Re: [PATCH v16 1/5] iommu/arm-smmu: re-enable context caching in smmu reset operation

Bibek Kumar Patro
2024-11-04T06:34:12Z

On 11/1/2024 5:40 PM, Will Deacon wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 30, 2024 at 05:00:13PM +0530, Bibek Kumar Patro wrote:
>> On 10/29/2024 6:17 PM, Will Deacon wrote:
>>> On Fri, Oct 25, 2024 at 07:51:22PM +0530, Bibek Kumar Patro wrote:
>>>> On 10/24/2024 6:22 PM, Will Deacon wrote:
>>>>> On Tue, Oct 08, 2024 at 06:24:06PM +0530, Bibek Kumar Patro wrote:
>>> If you want to gate the errata workarounds on policy, then please follow
>>> what we do for the CPU: add a Kconfig option (e.g.
>>> ARM_SMMU_WORKAROUND_BROKEN_CPRE) which defaults to "on" (assuming that
>>> the relevant errata aren't all "rare") and update silicon-errata.rst
>>> accordingly.
>>>
>>> Then you can choose to disable them in your .config if you're happy to
>>> pick up the pieces.
>>
>> This seems to be a good idea to me . I am thinking of this approach based on
>> your suggestion,
>> i.e. we can bind the original workaround in
>> arm_mmu500_reset implementation within ARM_SMMU_WORKAROUND_BROKEN_CPRE
>> config (defualts to on, CPRE would be disabled) and in QCOM SoCs default it
>> to off
>> (when ARM_SMMU_QCOM=Y -> switch ARM_SMMU_WORKAROUND_BROKEN_CPRE=N).
>
> ARM_SMMU_QCOM is enabled by default, so please don't do that. People who
> want to disable errata workarounds based on a hunch can do that themselves.
> There's no need to try to do that automatically in Kconfig.
>

Okay I see, that seems better. To allow users to manually toggle the
config switch for
disabling errata workarounds based on their specific needs,
rather than having it enabled by default.

>> In silicon-errata.rst would updating ARM_SMMU_WORKAROUND_BROKEN_CPRE be okay
>> , as the config names are based on erratum number.
>
> In this case, the Kconfig option covers a variety of errata so how about
> we go with:
>
> ARM_SMMU_MMU_500_CPRE_ERRATA
>
> and then you can list all of the numbers in the "Erratum ID" column?
>

Ack, this name sounds self-explanatory to me. Thanks for the suggestion,
I'll proceed with this name and ensure documenting the known numbers in
Erratum ID column
<#826419, #841119, #562869, #1047329>

Thanks & regards,
Bibek

> Will
>