From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from foss.arm.com (foss.arm.com [217.140.110.172]) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 66E5A15ECE1; Fri, 12 Jul 2024 15:34:15 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=217.140.110.172 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1720798457; cv=none; b=YracPZ3oSHXE5/zTodD3uZl+dL+dcSzKUhxeRudF9pHEagmlS9jACmxrIwLBK1987Acn5lKfAN5gpF/dNP4NlIkgdxhCnyOWMGtNVNlSFC+2MAXXZOIc8Id1BDFqEx3nXXsiGZxTyQBZoNRA8zIzcg3B01lbeGDI0BrqvgRkU+o= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1720798457; c=relaxed/simple; bh=SJIRZyX/ICybBrUmTLIKHvNwu1kYDLFaZJHiXyqtHTo=; h=Message-ID:Date:MIME-Version:Subject:To:Cc:References:From: In-Reply-To:Content-Type; b=kxzj/FW0iOIe0OxakueGB1B3HMIxfRM6DlSKAqs7Qh/qGQUpATWVpqKFuN086b/Cxu+3rRlx5mJNS6ay4kLSauJUSxOVgTQO7JfVsWiqbBXgO2XKKjjFgUXPQZEvSmxn48g+C3Z/5NxyYULIkJuTwAjAcp9t0ICGRCpc4gB8TcU= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=arm.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=arm.com; arc=none smtp.client-ip=217.140.110.172 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=arm.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=arm.com 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 DB6631007; Fri, 12 Jul 2024 08:34:39 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [10.1.196.40] (e121345-lin.cambridge.arm.com [10.1.196.40]) by usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 6DF5C3F762; Fri, 12 Jul 2024 08:34:12 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <96c1f2ff-7cb6-42bb-92fc-ab64ba8c1060@arm.com> Date: Fri, 12 Jul 2024 16:34:11 +0100 Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 2/5] iommu: Resolve fwspec ops automatically To: Will Deacon Cc: Jon Hunter , Joerg Roedel , linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, iommu@lists.linux.dev, devicetree@vger.kernel.org, Rob Herring , Saravana Kannan , Lorenzo Pieralisi , Hanjun Guo , Sudeep Holla , "Rafael J. Wysocki" , Len Brown , Jean-Philippe Brucker , Andy Shevchenko , Yong Wu , "linux-tegra@vger.kernel.org" References: <0e2727adeb8cd73274425322f2f793561bdc927e.1719919669.git.robin.murphy@arm.com> <0eec5f84-6b39-43ba-ab2f-914688a5cf45@nvidia.com> <01c05fb2-16ce-450c-befb-8a92ac2a8af9@arm.com> <82624cf6-98ad-47df-8dcd-368117600805@arm.com> <20240712153137.GC16474@willie-the-truck> From: Robin Murphy Content-Language: en-GB In-Reply-To: <20240712153137.GC16474@willie-the-truck> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit On 12/07/2024 4:31 pm, Will Deacon wrote: > On Fri, Jul 12, 2024 at 04:28:37PM +0100, Robin Murphy wrote: >> On 12/07/2024 4:24 pm, Jon Hunter wrote: >>> >>> On 12/07/2024 12:48, Robin Murphy wrote: >>> >>> ... >>> >>>>> I am seeing some failures on -next with some of our devices. >>>>> Bisect is pointing to this commit. Looks like the host1x device >>>>> is no longer probing successfully. I see the following ... >>>>> >>>>> ��tegra-host1x 50000000.host1x: failed to initialize fwspec: -517 >>>>> ��nouveau 57000000.gpu: failed to initialize fwspec: -517 >>>>> >>>>> The probe seems to be deferred forever. The above is seen on >>>>> Tegra210 but Tegra30 and Tegra194 are also having the same >>>>> problem. Interestingly it is not all devices and so make me >>>>> wonder if we are missing something on these devices? Let me know >>>>> if you have any thoughts. >>>> >>>> Ugh, tegra-smmu has been doing a complete nonsense this whole time - >>>> on closer inspection, it's passing the fwnode of the *client device* >>>> where it should be that of the IOMMU device :( >>>> >>>> I *think* it should probably just be a case of: >>>> >>>> -��� err = iommu_fwspec_init(dev, of_fwnode_handle(dev->of_node)); >>>> +��� err = iommu_fwspec_init(dev, of_fwnode_handle(smmu->dev->of_node)); >>>> >>>> since smmu->dev appears to be the same one initially passed to >>>> iommu_device_register(), so it at least ought to match and work, but >>>> the SMMU device vs. MC device thing leaves me mildly wary of how >>>> correct it might be overall. >>>> >>>> (Also now I'm wondering why I didn't just use dev_fwnode() there...) >>> >>> >>> Yes making that change in the tegra-smmu driver does fix it. >> >> Ace, thanks for confirming! I was just writing a follow-up to say that I've >> pretty much convinced myself that this (proper diff below) should in fact be >> the right thing to do in general as well :) >> >> Will, Joerg, would you prefer to have a standalone fix patch for the >> nvidia/tegra branch to then re-merge fwspec-ops-removal and fix up the >> conflict, or just a patch on top of fwspec-ops-removal as below? > > I've just fixed it locally on the tegra branch, so I'll then just > resolve the conflict with fwspec-ops-removal the right way. That way, we > can backport the thing if we need to. Cool, thanks for taking care of it! Robin.