Devicetree
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: sashiko-bot@kernel.org
To: "Manivannan Sadhasivam" <manivannan.sadhasivam@oss.qualcomm.com>
Cc: robh@kernel.org, conor+dt@kernel.org, devicetree@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 07/22] arm64: dts: qcom: sm8250: Fix the PCIe iommu-map entries
Date: Thu, 30 Jul 2026 12:06:48 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20260730120648.9C7501F000E9@smtp.kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260730-iommu-map-fix-v1-7-83405d37ba41@oss.qualcomm.com>

Thank you for your contribution! Sashiko AI review found 2 potential issue(s) to consider:
- [Critical] Modifying `iommu-map` entries from 4 cells to 5 cells breaks backwards compatibility with older kernels.
- [High] Adding a 5th cell to `iommu-map` entries breaks PCIe on SM8250 because the QCOM PCIe driver hardcodes a 4-cell structure when parsing this property.
--

--- Patch [7]: [PATCH 07/22] arm64: dts: qcom: sm8250: Fix the PCIe iommu-map entries ---
commit a5815a8c934e5c94f8aea5e79e5ac8f47d1465b8
Author: Manivannan Sadhasivam <manivannan.sadhasivam@oss.qualcomm.com>

arm64: dts: qcom: sm8250: Fix the PCIe iommu-map entries

The commit updates the iommu-map entries for PCIe to include two cells
for the IOMMU specifier, matching the apps_smmu #iommu-cells property.
This resolves a warning from the OF core about 1-cell entries targeting
2-cell #iommu-cells.

> diff --git a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sm8250.dtsi b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sm8250.dtsi
> index 7076720413ab2..c6f49ae9d253c 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sm8250.dtsi
> +++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sm8250.dtsi
> @@ -2190,8 +2190,8 @@ pcie0: pcie@1c00000 {
>  				      "tbu",
>  				      "ddrss_sf_tbu";
>  
> -			iommu-map = <0x0   &apps_smmu 0x1c00 0x1>,
> -				    <0x100 &apps_smmu 0x1c01 0x1>;
> +			iommu-map = <0x0   &apps_smmu 0x1c00 0x0 0x1>,
> +				    <0x100 &apps_smmu 0x1c01 0x0 0x1>;

[Severity: High]
Does this change break the qcom-pcie driver's parsing logic?

Looking at drivers/pci/controller/dwc/pcie-qcom.c, the driver has a fixed
structure it expects for iommu-map entries:

drivers/pci/controller/dwc/pcie-qcom.c:qcom_pcie_config_sid_1_9_0() {
	/* iommu map structure */
	struct {
		u32 bdf;
		u32 phandle;
		u32 smmu_sid;
		u32 smmu_sid_len;
	} *map;
	...
}

If the iommu-map property is updated to contain 5 cells instead of 4, will
this hardcoded struct misalign and read the wrong values for smmu_sid and
length?

[Severity: Critical]
Will this cause a regression for older kernels booting with this updated
device tree?

Prior to commit ccb2fd725d41, the generic of_map_id() function in
drivers/of/base.c enforced a length check that assumed exactly 4 cells per
entry. Adding a 5th cell will cause that modulo check to fail and return
-EINVAL.

Since device trees are often treated as firmware ABI, will older kernels
fail to parse these mappings entirely and break DMA isolation or cause SMMU
faults?

[ ... ]

-- 
Sashiko AI review · https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/20260730-iommu-map-fix-v1-0-83405d37ba41@oss.qualcomm.com?part=7

  reply	other threads:[~2026-07-30 12:06 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 36+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2026-07-30 11:55 [PATCH 00/22] arm64: dts: qcom: Fix the PCIe iommu-map entries Manivannan Sadhasivam via B4 Relay
2026-07-30 11:55 ` [PATCH 01/22] arm64: dts: qcom: kaanapali: " Manivannan Sadhasivam via B4 Relay
2026-07-30 11:55 ` [PATCH 02/22] arm64: dts: qcom: kodiak: " Manivannan Sadhasivam via B4 Relay
2026-07-30 12:08   ` sashiko-bot
2026-07-30 11:55 ` [PATCH 03/22] arm64: dts: qcom: sar2130p: " Manivannan Sadhasivam via B4 Relay
2026-07-30 11:55 ` [PATCH 04/22] arm64: dts: qcom: sc8180x: " Manivannan Sadhasivam via B4 Relay
2026-07-30 12:11   ` sashiko-bot
2026-07-30 11:55 ` [PATCH 05/22] arm64: dts: qcom: sdm845: " Manivannan Sadhasivam via B4 Relay
2026-07-30 11:55 ` [PATCH 06/22] arm64: dts: qcom: sm8150: " Manivannan Sadhasivam via B4 Relay
2026-07-30 11:55 ` [PATCH 07/22] arm64: dts: qcom: sm8250: " Manivannan Sadhasivam via B4 Relay
2026-07-30 12:06   ` sashiko-bot [this message]
2026-07-30 11:55 ` [PATCH 08/22] arm64: dts: qcom: sm8350: " Manivannan Sadhasivam via B4 Relay
2026-07-30 11:55 ` [PATCH 09/22] arm64: dts: qcom: sm8450: " Manivannan Sadhasivam via B4 Relay
2026-07-30 12:04   ` sashiko-bot
2026-07-30 11:55 ` [PATCH 10/22] arm64: dts: qcom: sm8550: " Manivannan Sadhasivam via B4 Relay
2026-07-30 13:39   ` Neil Armstrong
2026-07-30 11:55 ` [PATCH 11/22] arm64: dts: qcom: sm8650: " Manivannan Sadhasivam via B4 Relay
2026-07-30 13:39   ` Neil Armstrong
2026-07-30 11:55 ` [PATCH 12/22] arm64: dts: qcom: sm8750: " Manivannan Sadhasivam via B4 Relay
2026-07-30 11:55 ` [PATCH 13/22] arm64: dts: qcom: talos: " Manivannan Sadhasivam via B4 Relay
2026-07-30 12:07   ` sashiko-bot
2026-07-30 11:55 ` [PATCH 14/22] arm64: dts: qcom: lemans: " Manivannan Sadhasivam via B4 Relay
2026-07-30 11:55 ` [PATCH 15/22] arm64: dts: qcom: monaco: " Manivannan Sadhasivam via B4 Relay
2026-07-30 12:25   ` sashiko-bot
2026-07-30 11:55 ` [PATCH 16/22] arm64: dts: qcom: monaco-monza-som: " Manivannan Sadhasivam via B4 Relay
2026-07-30 11:55 ` [PATCH 17/22] arm64: dts: qcom: monaco-evk-ifp-mezzanine: " Manivannan Sadhasivam via B4 Relay
2026-07-30 12:09   ` sashiko-bot
2026-07-30 11:55 ` [PATCH 18/22] arm64: dts: qcom: lemans-evk-ifp-mezzanine: " Manivannan Sadhasivam via B4 Relay
2026-07-30 11:56 ` [PATCH 19/22] arm64: dts: qcom: qcs6490-radxa-dragon-q6a: " Manivannan Sadhasivam via B4 Relay
2026-07-30 11:56 ` [PATCH 20/22] arm64: dts: qcom: qcs6490-thundercomm-minipc-g1iot: " Manivannan Sadhasivam via B4 Relay
2026-07-30 12:29   ` sashiko-bot
2026-07-30 11:56 ` [PATCH 21/22] arm64: dts: qcom: qcs6490-rb3gen2: " Manivannan Sadhasivam via B4 Relay
2026-07-30 12:12   ` sashiko-bot
2026-07-30 11:56 ` [PATCH 22/22] arm64: dts: qcom: qcs6490-rb3gen2-industrial-mezzanine: " Manivannan Sadhasivam via B4 Relay
2026-07-30 12:23 ` [PATCH 00/22] arm64: dts: qcom: " Dmitry Baryshkov
2026-07-30 12:46 ` Konrad Dybcio

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=20260730120648.9C7501F000E9@smtp.kernel.org \
    --to=sashiko-bot@kernel.org \
    --cc=conor+dt@kernel.org \
    --cc=devicetree@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=manivannan.sadhasivam@oss.qualcomm.com \
    --cc=robh@kernel.org \
    --cc=sashiko-reviews@lists.linux.dev \
    /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