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 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.9 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,NICE_REPLY_A,SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2D718C47082 for ; Thu, 3 Jun 2021 12:06:01 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp2.osuosl.org (smtp2.osuosl.org [140.211.166.133]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CB7B9613E6 for ; Thu, 3 Jun 2021 12:06:00 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org CB7B9613E6 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=arm.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=iommu-bounces@lists.linux-foundation.org Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by smtp2.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9A734400ED; Thu, 3 Jun 2021 12:06:00 +0000 (UTC) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at osuosl.org Received: from smtp2.osuosl.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (smtp2.osuosl.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ZHbf2vXplzWE; Thu, 3 Jun 2021 12:05:57 +0000 (UTC) Received: from lists.linuxfoundation.org (lf-lists.osuosl.org [IPv6:2605:bc80:3010:104::8cd3:938]) by smtp2.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CC587400A7; Thu, 3 Jun 2021 12:05:56 +0000 (UTC) Received: from lf-lists.osuosl.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by lists.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AEC00C000D; Thu, 3 Jun 2021 12:05:56 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp2.osuosl.org (smtp2.osuosl.org [140.211.166.133]) by lists.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 99A71C0001 for ; Thu, 3 Jun 2021 12:05:55 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by smtp2.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9508F400CA for ; Thu, 3 Jun 2021 12:05:55 +0000 (UTC) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at osuosl.org Received: from smtp2.osuosl.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (smtp2.osuosl.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 8qy8Mvz3VpbX for ; Thu, 3 Jun 2021 12:05:51 +0000 (UTC) X-Greylist: domain auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.8.0 Received: from foss.arm.com (foss.arm.com [217.140.110.172]) by smtp2.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DD225400A7 for ; Thu, 3 Jun 2021 12:05:51 +0000 (UTC) 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 CB6A21063; Thu, 3 Jun 2021 05:05:50 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [10.57.73.64] (unknown [10.57.73.64]) by usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id D4AE23F774; Thu, 3 Jun 2021 05:05:49 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Re: Different type iommus integrated in a SoC To: "xxm@rock-chips.com" , hch , joro , will References: <2021052710373173260118@rock-chips.com> From: Robin Murphy Message-ID: <5d7127d5-b73c-2002-1734-98aab2295c8e@arm.com> Date: Thu, 3 Jun 2021 13:05:43 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.10.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <2021052710373173260118@rock-chips.com> Content-Language: en-GB Cc: linux-rockchip , iommu X-BeenThere: iommu@lists.linux-foundation.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: Development issues for Linux IOMMU support List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; Format="flowed" Errors-To: iommu-bounces@lists.linux-foundation.org Sender: "iommu" On 2021-05-27 03:37, xxm@rock-chips.com wrote: > Hi all, > > I have a SoC integrate with two different types of iommus, one is ARM SMMU, serves the PCIe/SATA/USB, > the others are vendor specific iommus, serves display device and multimedia device. > > In the current linux kernel, the iommu framework seems only support one type iommu at runtime, if enable both types iommu, only one type can work. > Is there any way to support this kind of SoC? Hooray! I've been forecasting this for years, but the cases we regularly hit with internal FPGA prototyping (nor the secret unused MMU-400 I found on RK3288) have never really been a strong enough argument to stand behind. Based on what I remember from looking into this a few years ago, converting *most* of the API to per-device ops (now via dev->iommu) is trivial; the main challenge will be getting the per-device data bootstrapped in iommu_probe_device(), which would probably need to rely on the fwspec and/or list of registered IOMMU instances. The other notable thing which will need to change is the domain allocation interface, but in practice I think everyone who calls iommu_domain_alloc() today is in fact doing so for a specific device, so I don't think it's as big a problem as it might first appear. Robin. _______________________________________________ iommu mailing list iommu@lists.linux-foundation.org https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/iommu