From: Baolu Lu <baolu.lu@linux.intel.com>
To: Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@arm.com>, joro@8bytes.org, will@kernel.org
Cc: baolu.lu@linux.intel.com, hch@lst.de, jgg@nvidia.com,
iommu@lists.linux.dev, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
"Rafael J . Wysocki" <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 6/8] iommu: Retire bus ops
Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2023 20:37:17 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <31e5007b-8151-4ec6-9b63-a64a5888d2a9@linux.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4a065a3f-d189-711a-e351-73852ed00369@arm.com>
On 2023/1/20 20:31, Robin Murphy wrote:
> On 2023-01-20 00:27, Baolu Lu wrote:
>> On 2023/1/20 3:18, Robin Murphy wrote:
>>> + /*
>>> + * For FDT-based systems and ACPI IORT/VIOT, drivers register IOMMU
>>> + * instances with non-NULL fwnodes, and client devices should
>>> have been
>>> + * identified with a fwspec by this point. For
>>> Intel/AMD/s390/PAMU we
>>> + * can assume a single active driver with global ops, and so
>>> grab those
>>> + * from any registered instance, cheekily co-opting the same
>>> mechanism.
>>> + */
>>> + fwspec = dev_iommu_fwspec_get(dev);
>>> + if (fwspec && fwspec->ops)
>>> + ops = fwspec->ops;
>>> + else
>>> + ops = iommu_ops_from_fwnode(NULL);
>>
>> I'm imagining if Intel/AMD/s390 drivers need to give up global ops.
>> Is there any way to allow them to make such conversion? I am just
>> thinking about whether this is a hard limitation for these drivers.
>
> Yes, they could perhaps bodge into the existing fwnode mechanism, or we
> could make bigger changes to adapt and generalise the whole
> instance-registration-token-lookup concept, or if the driver can resolve
> the correct instance for a device internally, then it could suffice to
> just have all its device ops share a single common .probe_device
> implementation that does the right thing.
Yes. Sharing a common .probe_device entry and let the IOMMU driver
connect the device and its iommu ops is a feasible solution. Thanks!
>
> The comment is merely noting the fact that we can get away without
> having to worry about those changes just yet, since all the drivers
> *are* currently still built around the hard constraint of a single set
> of device ops per bus.
Yes. Fair enough.
--
Best regards,
baolu
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-01-26 12:37 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 32+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-01-19 19:18 [PATCH 0/8] iommu: The early demise of " Robin Murphy
2023-01-19 19:18 ` [PATCH 1/8] iommu: Decouple iommu_present() from " Robin Murphy
2023-01-26 13:13 ` Baolu Lu
2023-01-26 14:21 ` Robin Murphy
2023-01-26 14:41 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2023-01-27 13:50 ` Baolu Lu
2023-01-27 13:59 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2023-01-27 15:19 ` Robin Murphy
2023-01-27 15:43 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2023-01-28 8:49 ` Baolu Lu
2023-01-30 13:49 ` Robin Murphy
2023-01-30 13:53 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2023-01-30 14:22 ` Oded Gabbay
2023-01-19 19:18 ` [PATCH 2/8] iommu: Validate that devices match domains Robin Murphy
2023-01-19 19:18 ` [PATCH 3/8] iommu: Factor out a "first device in group" helper Robin Murphy
2023-01-19 19:23 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2023-01-19 19:36 ` Robin Murphy
2023-01-19 19:18 ` [PATCH 4/8] iommu: Switch __iommu_domain_alloc() to device ops Robin Murphy
2023-01-19 19:26 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2023-01-19 20:12 ` Robin Murphy
2023-01-19 19:18 ` [PATCH 5/8] iommu/arm-smmu: Don't register fwnode for legacy binding Robin Murphy
2023-01-19 19:18 ` [PATCH 6/8] iommu: Retire bus ops Robin Murphy
2023-01-20 0:27 ` Baolu Lu
2023-01-20 12:31 ` Robin Murphy
2023-01-26 12:37 ` Baolu Lu [this message]
2023-01-20 10:23 ` Greg Kroah-Hartman
2023-01-19 19:18 ` [PATCH 7/8] iommu: Clean up open-coded ownership checks Robin Murphy
2023-01-19 19:31 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2023-01-19 20:52 ` Robin Murphy
2023-01-19 19:18 ` [PATCH 8/8] iommu: Pass device through ops->domain_alloc Robin Murphy
2023-01-19 19:34 ` [PATCH 0/8] iommu: The early demise of bus ops Jason Gunthorpe
2023-01-20 12:33 ` Joerg Roedel
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=31e5007b-8151-4ec6-9b63-a64a5888d2a9@linux.intel.com \
--to=baolu.lu@linux.intel.com \
--cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=hch@lst.de \
--cc=iommu@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=jgg@nvidia.com \
--cc=joro@8bytes.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com \
--cc=robin.murphy@arm.com \
--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
Powered by JetHome