Re: [PATCH v2 3/9] iommu/arm-smmu-v3: Use the HW arm_smmu_cmd in cmdq submission functions

[Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@nvidia.com>]

On Fri, May 15, 2026 at 02:02:57PM -0700, Nicolin Chen wrote:
> On Wed, May 13, 2026 at 08:57:42PM -0300, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> > Continue removing struct arm_smmu_cmdq_ent in favour of the HW based
> > struct arm_smmu_cmd. Switch the lower level issue commands to work on
> > the native struct by lifting arm_smmu_cmdq_build_cmd() into all the
> > callers.
> > 
> > Following patches will revise each of the arm_smmu_cmdq_build_cmd()
> > call sites to replace it with the HW struct.
> > 
> > Reviewed-by: Mostafa Saleh <smostafa@google.com>
> > Reviewed-by: Pranjal Shrivastava <praan@google.com>
> > Tested-by: Pranjal Shrivastava <praan@google.com>
> > Tested-by: Mostafa Saleh <smostafa@google.com>
> > Signed-off-by: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@nvidia.com>
> [...]
> > @@ -3446,6 +3447,7 @@ arm_smmu_install_new_domain_invs(struct arm_smmu_attach_state *state)
> >  static void arm_smmu_inv_flush_iotlb_tag(struct arm_smmu_inv *inv)
> >  {
> >  	struct arm_smmu_cmdq_ent cmd = {};
> > +	struct arm_smmu_cmd hw_cmd;
> 
> Following the other pattern, this could be:
>     "cmd" -> "ent" and "hw_cmd" -> "cmd"?
> 
> That being said, at the end of the series, these all get removed.

Yeah, I made choices to minimize the diffs

Jason