Re: [PATCH 2/3] iommu/arm-smmu: add ACTLR data and support for SM8550

[Bibek Kumar Patro <quic_bibekkum@quicinc.com>]

On 11/4/2023 4:11 AM, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote:
> On Sat, 4 Nov 2023 at 00:38, Bibek Kumar Patro
> <quic_bibekkum@quicinc.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> On 11/4/2023 3:31 AM, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote:
>>> On Fri, 3 Nov 2023 at 23:53, Bibek Kumar Patro
>>> <quic_bibekkum@quicinc.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Add ACTLR data table for SM8550 along with support for
>>>> same including SM8550 specific implementation operations.
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Bibek Kumar Patro <quic_bibekkum@quicinc.com>
>>>> ---
>>>>    drivers/iommu/arm/arm-smmu/arm-smmu-qcom.c | 85 +++++++++++++++++++++-
>>>>    1 file changed, 81 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>>>>
>>>> diff --git a/drivers/iommu/arm/arm-smmu/arm-smmu-qcom.c b/drivers/iommu/arm/arm-smmu/arm-smmu-qcom.c
>>>> index 68c1f4908473..590b7c285299 100644
>>>> --- a/drivers/iommu/arm/arm-smmu/arm-smmu-qcom.c
>>>> +++ b/drivers/iommu/arm/arm-smmu/arm-smmu-qcom.c
>>>> @@ -25,6 +25,64 @@ struct actlr_data {
>>>>           u32 actlr;
>>>>    };
>>>>
>>>> +static const struct actlr_data sm8550_apps_actlr_data[] = {
>>>> +       { 0x18a0, 0x0000, 0x00000103 },
>>>> +       { 0x18e0, 0x0000, 0x00000103 },
>>>> +       { 0x0800, 0x0020, 0x00000001 },
>>>> +       { 0x1800, 0x00c0, 0x00000001 },
>>>> +       { 0x1820, 0x0000, 0x00000001 },
>>>> +       { 0x1860, 0x0000, 0x00000001 },
>>>> +       { 0x0c01, 0x0020, 0x00000303 },
>>>> +       { 0x0c02, 0x0020, 0x00000303 },
>>>> +       { 0x0c03, 0x0020, 0x00000303 },
>>>> +       { 0x0c04, 0x0020, 0x00000303 },
>>>> +       { 0x0c05, 0x0020, 0x00000303 },
>>>> +       { 0x0c06, 0x0020, 0x00000303 },
>>>> +       { 0x0c07, 0x0020, 0x00000303 },
>>>> +       { 0x0c08, 0x0020, 0x00000303 },
>>>> +       { 0x0c09, 0x0020, 0x00000303 },
>>>> +       { 0x0c0c, 0x0020, 0x00000303 },
>>>> +       { 0x0c0d, 0x0020, 0x00000303 },
>>>> +       { 0x0c0e, 0x0020, 0x00000303 },
>>>> +       { 0x0c0f, 0x0020, 0x00000303 },
>>>> +       { 0x1961, 0x0000, 0x00000303 },
>>>> +       { 0x1962, 0x0000, 0x00000303 },
>>>> +       { 0x1963, 0x0000, 0x00000303 },
>>>> +       { 0x1964, 0x0000, 0x00000303 },
>>>> +       { 0x1965, 0x0000, 0x00000303 },
>>>> +       { 0x1966, 0x0000, 0x00000303 },
>>>> +       { 0x1967, 0x0000, 0x00000303 },
>>>> +       { 0x1968, 0x0000, 0x00000303 },
>>>> +       { 0x1969, 0x0000, 0x00000303 },
>>>> +       { 0x196c, 0x0000, 0x00000303 },
>>>> +       { 0x196d, 0x0000, 0x00000303 },
>>>> +       { 0x196e, 0x0000, 0x00000303 },
>>>> +       { 0x196f, 0x0000, 0x00000303 },
>>>> +       { 0x19c1, 0x0010, 0x00000303 },
>>>> +       { 0x19c2, 0x0010, 0x00000303 },
>>>> +       { 0x19c3, 0x0010, 0x00000303 },
>>>> +       { 0x19c4, 0x0010, 0x00000303 },
>>>> +       { 0x19c5, 0x0010, 0x00000303 },
>>>> +       { 0x19c6, 0x0010, 0x00000303 },
>>>> +       { 0x19c7, 0x0010, 0x00000303 },
>>>> +       { 0x19c8, 0x0010, 0x00000303 },
>>>> +       { 0x19c9, 0x0010, 0x00000303 },
>>>> +       { 0x19cc, 0x0010, 0x00000303 },
>>>> +       { 0x19cd, 0x0010, 0x00000303 },
>>>> +       { 0x19ce, 0x0010, 0x00000303 },
>>>> +       { 0x19cf, 0x0010, 0x00000303 },
>>>> +       { 0x1c00, 0x0002, 0x00000103 },
>>>> +       { 0x1c01, 0x0000, 0x00000001 },
>>>> +       { 0x1920, 0x0000, 0x00000103 },
>>>> +       { 0x1923, 0x0000, 0x00000103 },
>>>> +       { 0x1924, 0x0000, 0x00000103 },
>>>> +       { 0x1940, 0x0000, 0x00000103 },
>>>> +       { 0x1941, 0x0004, 0x00000103 },
>>>> +       { 0x1943, 0x0000, 0x00000103 },
>>>> +       { 0x1944, 0x0000, 0x00000103 },
>>>> +       { 0x1947, 0x0000, 0x00000103 },
>>>> +};
>>>
>>> This is nearly impossible to handle.
>>> Please add defines for 0x1, 0x103 and 0x303. Also please consider
>>> adding comments for the devices.
>>>
>>
>> Ack, Initially added the comments for devices, but since only driver is
>> handling this data, and clients won't refer this so removed it. Will
>> consider adding it back.
> 
> It will help developers / porters who will try matching the SID and the device.
> 

Agree on the same, I'll add those comments for devices back.

>>   This actlr field value might different (other
>> than 0x1,0x103,0x303) in other platforms as per my anticipation,
>> depending on the bit settings, so won't the defines change with
>> different platforms? Hence this register setting value might be apt?
> 
> It is simple. 0x1, 0x103 and 0x303 are pure magic values. Please
> provide sensible defines so that we can understand and review them.
>

Understandable, In next patch I'll populate the actlr_data in
following format { SID, MASK, PRE_FETCH_n | CPRE | CMTLB }.
where " PRE_FETCH_n | CPRE | CMTLB " will be defines for
the actlr values (0x1,0x103,0x303).
This would help in understanding these values. Hope this
proposed format will be okay?


> Other platforms might use new defines.
> 
>>
>>>> +
>>>>    static struct qcom_smmu *to_qcom_smmu(struct arm_smmu_device *smmu)
>>>>    {
>>>>           return container_of(smmu, struct qcom_smmu, smmu);
>>>> @@ -444,6 +502,16 @@ static const struct arm_smmu_impl sdm845_smmu_500_impl = {
>>>>           .tlb_sync = qcom_smmu_tlb_sync,
>>>>    };
>>>>
>>>> +
>>>> +static const struct arm_smmu_impl sm8550_smmu_500_impl = {
>>>> +       .init_context = qcom_smmu_init_context,
>>>> +       .cfg_probe = qcom_smmu_cfg_probe,
>>>> +       .def_domain_type = qcom_smmu_def_domain_type,
>>>> +       .reset = arm_mmu500_reset,
>>>> +       .write_s2cr = qcom_smmu_write_s2cr,
>>>> +       .tlb_sync = qcom_smmu_tlb_sync,
>>>> +};
>>>> +
>>>>    static const struct arm_smmu_impl qcom_adreno_smmu_v2_impl = {
>>>>           .init_context = qcom_adreno_smmu_init_context,
>>>>           .def_domain_type = qcom_smmu_def_domain_type,
>>>> @@ -507,6 +575,11 @@ static const struct qcom_smmu_config qcom_smmu_impl0_cfg = {
>>>>           .reg_offset = qcom_smmu_impl0_reg_offset,
>>>>    };
>>>>
>>>> +static const struct actlr_config sm8550_actlrcfg = {
>>>> +       .adata = sm8550_apps_actlr_data,
>>>> +       .size = ARRAY_SIZE(sm8550_apps_actlr_data),
>>>> +};
>>>> +
>>>>    /*
>>>>     * It is not yet possible to use MDP SMMU with the bypass quirk on the msm8996,
>>>>     * there are not enough context banks.
>>>> @@ -530,16 +603,20 @@ static const struct qcom_smmu_match_data sdm845_smmu_500_data = {
>>>>           /* Also no debug configuration. */
>>>>    };
>>>>
>>>> +
>>>> +static const struct qcom_smmu_match_data sm8550_smmu_500_impl0_data = {
>>>> +       .impl = &sm8550_smmu_500_impl,
>>>> +       .adreno_impl = &qcom_adreno_smmu_500_impl,
>>>> +       .cfg = &qcom_smmu_impl0_cfg,
>>>> +       .actlrcfg = &sm8550_actlrcfg,
>>>> +};
>>>
>>> This structure doesn't seem to be linked. Did you test your patches?
>>>
>>
>> Apologies Dmitry, just checked back my patches, I tested it but while
>> refining the patches I somehow missed this link
>> { .compatible = "qcom,sm8550-smmu-500", .data =
>> &sm8550_smmu_500_impl0_data };
>> in below qcom_smmu_500_impl0_data structure.
>> I will take care of this in next version.
>>
>>>> +
>>>>    static const struct qcom_smmu_match_data qcom_smmu_500_impl0_data = {
>>>>           .impl = &qcom_smmu_500_impl,
>>>>           .adreno_impl = &qcom_adreno_smmu_500_impl,
>>>>           .cfg = &qcom_smmu_impl0_cfg,
>>>>    };
>>>>
>>>> -/*
>>>> - * Do not add any more qcom,SOC-smmu-500 entries to this list, unless they need
>>>> - * special handling and can not be covered by the qcom,smmu-500 entry.
>>>> - */
>>>
>>> Leave the comment in place.
>>>
>>
>> Thanks for this comment which helped me to note the above mentioned
>> mistake.
>>
>>>>    static const struct of_device_id __maybe_unused qcom_smmu_impl_of_match[] = {
>>>>           { .compatible = "qcom,msm8996-smmu-v2", .data = &msm8996_smmu_data },
>>>>           { .compatible = "qcom,msm8998-smmu-v2", .data = &qcom_smmu_v2_data },
>>>> --
>>>> 2.17.1
>>>>
>>>
>>>
> 
> 
> 

_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel