From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from bombadil.infradead.org (bombadil.infradead.org [198.137.202.133]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id F026AC83F2C for ; Tue, 5 Sep 2023 12:58:55 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=lists.infradead.org; s=bombadil.20210309; h=Sender:Content-Type: Content-Transfer-Encoding:List-Subscribe:List-Help:List-Post:List-Archive: List-Unsubscribe:List-Id:In-Reply-To:From:References:Cc:To:Subject: MIME-Version:Date:Message-ID:Reply-To:Content-ID:Content-Description: Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID: List-Owner; bh=s7oue0JXkayZHPRsUURAIqoGXv6RtDuSJs8myMZ5tKY=; b=mWZMtZmhMcIrr+ 99TgZaiDke8x5ql1hO7VAvSlpWM0jSpdWGJXoD+CcL1Qsw/3+MlaDceYfpC0cPTiEHuA16JG1jkVO C5XKmWq0TmJO/7A1flkFeo5xjgNymkZI28gziMN92rUdMihFNczjAYNT0yXVBBy8nQN7eg2D1s2l5 LsuoVu79akZfeV82b9zZljw7rMQ+1JzUJjf0SZy6pFKp8EW+SyT1VY2UtzWHW6ig5Pp/EHKY0aPV6 Pt5DSrmnOwZrsKqWcAIQ06ouj85oBH99cPavgiCuLrl0YKjVVMYbmRv8FzyA5PrZJjeqyoVykShc3 ZgWz7Zy9Pfg42wh/uCgA==; Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=bombadil.infradead.org) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtp (Exim 4.96 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1qdVdO-0063ay-21; Tue, 05 Sep 2023 12:58:22 +0000 Received: from foss.arm.com ([217.140.110.172]) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtp (Exim 4.96 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1qdVdK-0063aY-36 for linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org; Tue, 05 Sep 2023 12:58:21 +0000 Received: from usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com (unknown [10.121.207.14]) by usa-sjc-mx-foss1.foss.arm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 53B4211FB; Tue, 5 Sep 2023 05:58:49 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [10.1.196.40] (e121345-lin.cambridge.arm.com [10.1.196.40]) by usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 04A003F67D; Tue, 5 Sep 2023 05:58:09 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: Date: Tue, 5 Sep 2023 13:57:57 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux aarch64; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/102.13.0 Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] dt-bindings: interrupt-controller: arm,gic-v3: Add dma-noncoherent property Content-Language: en-GB To: Lorenzo Pieralisi Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Rob Herring , linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, devicetree@vger.kernel.org, Mark Rutland , Rob Herring , Fang Xiang , Marc Zyngier References: <20230905104721.52199-1-lpieralisi@kernel.org> <20230905104721.52199-2-lpieralisi@kernel.org> <932355b4-7d43-a465-a2da-8dded8e2d069@arm.com> From: Robin Murphy In-Reply-To: X-CRM114-Version: 20100106-BlameMichelson ( TRE 0.8.0 (BSD) ) MR-646709E3 X-CRM114-CacheID: sfid-20230905_055819_117694_108FB29C X-CRM114-Status: GOOD ( 32.76 ) X-BeenThere: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.34 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; Format="flowed" Sender: "linux-arm-kernel" Errors-To: linux-arm-kernel-bounces+linux-arm-kernel=archiver.kernel.org@lists.infradead.org On 05/09/2023 1:22 pm, Lorenzo Pieralisi wrote: > On Tue, Sep 05, 2023 at 12:17:51PM +0100, Robin Murphy wrote: >> On 05/09/2023 11:47 am, Lorenzo Pieralisi wrote: >>> The GIC v3 specifications allow redistributors and ITSes interconnect >>> ports used to access memory to be wired up in a way that makes the >>> respective initiators/memory observers non-coherent. >>> >>> Add the standard dma-noncoherent property to the GICv3 bindings to >>> allow firmware to describe the redistributors/ITSes components and >>> interconnect ports behaviour in system designs where the redistributors >>> and ITSes are not coherent with the CPU. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Lorenzo Pieralisi >>> Cc: Rob Herring >>> --- >>> .../bindings/interrupt-controller/arm,gic-v3.yaml | 8 ++++++++ >>> 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+) >>> >>> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/interrupt-controller/arm,gic-v3.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/interrupt-controller/arm,gic-v3.yaml >>> index 39e64c7f6360..0a81ae4519a6 100644 >>> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/interrupt-controller/arm,gic-v3.yaml >>> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/interrupt-controller/arm,gic-v3.yaml >>> @@ -106,6 +106,10 @@ properties: >>> $ref: /schemas/types.yaml#/definitions/uint32 >>> maximum: 4096 >>> + dma-noncoherent: >>> + description: | >>> + Present if the GIC redistributors are not cache coherent with the CPU. >> >> I wonder if it's worth being a bit more specific here, e.g. "if the GIC >> {redistributors,ITS} permit programming cacheable inner-shareable memory >> attributes, but are connected to a non-coherent downstream interconnect." > > In my opinion it is and I wanted to elaborate on what I wrote but then I > thought that this is a standard DT property, I wasn't sure whether we > really need to explain what it is there for. > > We are using the property to plug a hole so I agree with you, we should > be as clear as possible in the property definition but I will rely on > Rob/Marc's opinion, I don't know what's the DT policy for this. > >> That might help clarify why the negative property, which could seem a bit >> backwards at first glance, and that it's not so important in the cases where >> the GIC itself is fundamentally non-coherent anyway (which *is* >> software-discoverable). > > Is it ? Again, see above, are we defining "dma-noncoherent" to fix a bug > or to fix the specs ? The shareability bits are writeable and even a > fundamentally non-coherent GIC design could allow writing them, AFAIU. I mean the case on GIC-500 and earlier where the register bits could be hard-wired. I'm not sure a GIC implementation which didn't even *try* to honour the programmed attributes in what it emits would be considered valid; it certainly couldn't be considered sensible :/ > I would avoid putting ourselves into a corner where we can't use > this property because the binding itself is too strict on what it is > solving. Really I'm just getting at the fact that if you do have a legacy GIC with hard-wired attributes then whatever DT says is most likely irrelevant anyway (unless the integrator has done something utterly bonkers and tied off the interconnect input to *different* attributes, but I would consider that beyond the bounds of fair reasoning...) Cheers, Robin. >> Otherwise, this is the same approach that I like and have previously lobbied >> for, so obviously I approve :) >> >> (plus I do think it's the right shape to be able to slot an equivalent field >> into ACPI MADT entries without *too* much bother) > > We are in agreement, let's see what others think. > > Thanks, > Lorenzo > >> >> Thanks, >> Robin. >> >>> + >>> msi-controller: >>> description: >>> Only present if the Message Based Interrupt functionality is >>> @@ -193,6 +197,10 @@ patternProperties: >>> compatible: >>> const: arm,gic-v3-its >>> + dma-noncoherent: >>> + description: | >>> + Present if the GIC ITS is not cache coherent with the CPU. >>> + >>> msi-controller: true >>> "#msi-cells": >> >> _______________________________________________ >> linux-arm-kernel mailing list >> linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org >> http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel _______________________________________________ linux-arm-kernel mailing list linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel