From: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org>
To: Dmitry Baryshkov <dmitry.baryshkov@linaro.org>,
Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>,
Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@arm.com>,
Joerg Roedel <joro@8bytes.org>, Rob Herring <robh+dt@kernel.org>,
Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@linaro.org>,
Bjorn Andersson <andersson@kernel.org>,
Konrad Dybcio <konrad.dybcio@somainline.org>,
Rob Clark <robdclark@gmail.com>
Cc: Vinod Koul <vkoul@kernel.org>,
Sai Prakash Ranjan <quic_saipraka@quicinc.com>,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org, iommu@lists.linux.dev,
devicetree@vger.kernel.org, freedreno@lists.freedesktop.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 1/9] dt-bindings: arm-smmu: Add missing Qualcomm SMMU compatibles
Date: Sat, 22 Oct 2022 11:42:46 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <c86e5263-50b3-cdff-0bc5-2c2a578d5ada@linaro.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <48e13203-2588-618b-4fde-3004b2472783@linaro.org>
On 22/10/2022 05:17, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote:
> On 22/10/2022 03:59, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>> On 21/10/2022 12:55, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote:
>>> Add missing compatibles used for Adreno SMMU on sc7280 and sm8450
>>> platforms and for the Qualcomm v2 SMMU used on SDM630 platform.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Dmitry Baryshkov <dmitry.baryshkov@linaro.org>
>>> ---
>>> Documentation/devicetree/bindings/iommu/arm,smmu.yaml | 11 +++++++++++
>>> 1 file changed, 11 insertions(+)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/iommu/arm,smmu.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/iommu/arm,smmu.yaml
>>> index 9066e6df1ba1..34ee33a62ba5 100644
>>> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/iommu/arm,smmu.yaml
>>> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/iommu/arm,smmu.yaml
>>> @@ -28,6 +28,7 @@ properties:
>>> - enum:
>>> - qcom,msm8996-smmu-v2
>>> - qcom,msm8998-smmu-v2
>>> + - qcom,sdm630-smmu-v2
>>
>> So qcom,adreno-smmu is not compatible with Adreno? See below.
>>
>>> - const: qcom,smmu-v2
>>>
>>> - description: Qcom SoCs implementing "arm,mmu-500"
>>> @@ -48,10 +49,20 @@ properties:
>>> - qcom,sm8350-smmu-500
>>> - qcom,sm8450-smmu-500
>>> - const: arm,mmu-500
>>> +
>>> + - description: Qcom Adreno GPUs implementing "arm,smmu-500"
>>> + items:
>>> + - enum:
>>> + - qcom,sc7280-smmu-500
>>> + - qcom,sm8250-smmu-500
>>> + - const: qcom,adreno-smmu
>>> + - const: arm,mmu-500
>>> - description: Qcom Adreno GPUs implementing "arm,smmu-v2"
>>> items:
>>> - enum:
>>> + - qcom,msm8996-smmu-v2
>>> - qcom,sc7180-smmu-v2
>>> + - qcom,sdm630-smmu-v2
>>
>> This does not look correct. The same compatible should not be present in
>> two different setups.
>>
>> If qcom,msm8996-smmu-v2 is compatible with qcom,adreno-smmu, then your
>> first hunk is not correct.
>
> Currently the qcom,adreno-smmu compat string is used as a flag, telling
> the kernel that this SMMU instance needs some special setup to work with
> Adreno GPU driver
Indeed, I see the usage in DTS,
>
> For example, we have the following compat lists in the existing DT files:
> - "qcom,msm8996-smmu-v2", "qcom,adreno-smmu", "qcom,smmu-v2"
> - "qcom,msm8996-smmu-v2", "qcom,smmu-v2" // not handled by arm-qcom-smmu
>
> - "qcom,sdm630-smmu-v2", "qcom,adreno-smmu", "qcom,smmu-v2"
> - "qcom,sdm630-smmu-v2", "qcom,smmu-v2"
>
> - "qcom,sdm845-smmu-v2", "qcom,adreno-smmu", "qcom,smmu-v2"
> - "qcom,sdm845-smmu-500", "arm,mmu-500"
> - "qcom,sdm845-smmu-v2", "qcom,smmu-v2" // special setup used on Cheza
>
> - "qcom,sm8250-smmu-500", "qcom,adreno-smmu", "arm,mmu-500"
> - "qcom,sm8250-smmu-500", "arm,mmu-500"
>
>
> As we are trying to refactor the IOMMU bindings, what would be your
> recommendation?
>
> To introduce minimal changes, I wanted to have the following lists:
> - "qcom,SOC-smmu-500", "qcom,adreno-smmu", "qcom,smmu-500", "arm,mmu-500"
>
> - "qcom,SOC-smmu-500", "qcom,smmu-500", "arm,mmu-500"
>
> However maybe you would prefer the following model:
>
> - "qcom,SOC-adreno-smmu-500", "qcom,adreno-smmu-500", "arm,mmu-500"
> - "qcom,SOC-smmu-500", "qcom,smmu-500", "arm,mmu-500"
If we started from scratch, I would prefer this one, however as DTSes
are already using your previous method, It's fine.
It's a bit confusing to have most specific compatible followed by
different fallbacks, but we already have few cases for this (e.g.
Renesas boards), so I guess it is fine here as well. At the end entire
compatible list uniquely describes the hardware.
>
>
> Or:
> - "qcom,SOC-smmu-500", "qcom,smmu-500", "arm,mmu-500" +
> 'qcom,adreno-smmu' flag/property?
>
>
>>
>>> - qcom,sdm845-smmu-v2
>>> - const: qcom,adreno-smmu
>>> - const: qcom,smmu-v2
>>
>> Best regards,
>> Krzysztof
>>
>
Best regards,
Krzysztof
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-10-22 15:42 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 22+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-10-21 16:55 [RFC PATCH 0/9] iommy/arm-smmu-qcom: Rework Qualcomm SMMU bindings and implementation Dmitry Baryshkov
2022-10-21 16:55 ` [RFC PATCH 1/9] dt-bindings: arm-smmu: Add missing Qualcomm SMMU compatibles Dmitry Baryshkov
2022-10-22 0:59 ` Krzysztof Kozlowski
2022-10-22 9:17 ` Dmitry Baryshkov
2022-10-22 15:42 ` Krzysztof Kozlowski [this message]
2022-10-22 15:43 ` Krzysztof Kozlowski
2022-10-21 16:55 ` [RFC PATCH 2/9] dt-bindings: arm-smmu: fix clocks/clock-names schema Dmitry Baryshkov
2022-10-21 21:00 ` Rob Herring
2022-10-21 16:55 ` [RFC PATCH 3/9] dt-bindings: arm-smmu: Add generic qcom,smmu-500 bindings Dmitry Baryshkov
2022-10-22 15:45 ` Krzysztof Kozlowski
2022-10-21 16:55 ` [RFC PATCH 4/9] iommu/arm-smmu-qcom: Move implementation data into match data Dmitry Baryshkov
2022-10-27 3:10 ` Sai Prakash Ranjan
2022-10-21 16:55 ` [RFC PATCH 5/9] iommu/arm-smmu-qcom: Move the qcom,adreno-smmu check into qcom_smmu_create Dmitry Baryshkov
2022-10-27 3:11 ` Sai Prakash Ranjan
2022-10-21 16:55 ` [RFC PATCH 6/9] iommu/arm-smmu-qcom: provide separate implementation for SDM845-smmu-500 Dmitry Baryshkov
2022-10-27 3:12 ` Sai Prakash Ranjan
2022-10-21 16:55 ` [RFC PATCH 7/9] iommu/arm-smmu-qcom: Merge table from arm-smmu-qcom-debug into match data Dmitry Baryshkov
2022-10-27 3:08 ` Sai Prakash Ranjan
2022-10-21 16:55 ` [RFC PATCH 8/9] iommu/arm-smmu-qcom: Stop using mmu500 reset for v2 MMUs Dmitry Baryshkov
2022-10-27 3:13 ` Sai Prakash Ranjan
2022-10-21 16:55 ` [RFC PATCH 9/9] iommu/arm-smmu-qcom: Add generic qcom,smmu-500 match entry Dmitry Baryshkov
2022-10-27 3:12 ` Sai Prakash Ranjan
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=c86e5263-50b3-cdff-0bc5-2c2a578d5ada@linaro.org \
--to=krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org \
--cc=andersson@kernel.org \
--cc=devicetree@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=dmitry.baryshkov@linaro.org \
--cc=freedreno@lists.freedesktop.org \
--cc=iommu@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=joro@8bytes.org \
--cc=konrad.dybcio@somainline.org \
--cc=krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@linaro.org \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=quic_saipraka@quicinc.com \
--cc=robdclark@gmail.com \
--cc=robh+dt@kernel.org \
--cc=robin.murphy@arm.com \
--cc=vkoul@kernel.org \
--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).