Re: [PATCH 1/6] Docs: dt: add fsl-mc iommu-parent device-tree binding

[Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@arm.com>]

On 05/03/18 15:00, Nipun Gupta wrote:
> 
> 
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Robin Murphy [mailto:robin.murphy@arm.com]
>> Sent: Monday, March 05, 2018 20:23
>> To: Nipun Gupta <nipun.gupta@nxp.com>; will.deacon@arm.com;
>> mark.rutland@arm.com; catalin.marinas@arm.com
>> Cc: iommu@lists.linux-foundation.org; robh+dt@kernel.org; hch@lst.de;
>> m.szyprowski@samsung.com; gregkh@linuxfoundation.org; joro@8bytes.org;
>> Leo Li <leoyang.li@nxp.com>; shawnguo@kernel.org; linux-
>> kernel@vger.kernel.org; devicetree@vger.kernel.org; linux-arm-
>> kernel@lists.infradead.org; linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org; Bharat Bhushan
>> <bharat.bhushan@nxp.com>; stuyoder@gmail.com; Laurentiu Tudor
>> <laurentiu.tudor@nxp.com>
>> Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/6] Docs: dt: add fsl-mc iommu-parent device-tree binding
>>
>> On 05/03/18 14:29, Nipun Gupta wrote:
>>> The existing IOMMU bindings cannot be used to specify the relationship
>>> between fsl-mc devices and IOMMUs. This patch adds a binding for
>>> mapping fsl-mc devices to IOMMUs, using a new iommu-parent property.
>>
>> Given that allowing "msi-parent" for #msi-cells > 1 is merely a
>> backward-compatibility bodge full of hard-coded assumptions, why would
>> we want to knowingly introduce a similarly unpleasant equivalent for
>> IOMMUs? What's wrong with "iommu-map"?
> 
> Hi Robin,
> 
> With 'msi-parent' the property is fixed up to have msi-map. In this case there is
> no fixup required and simple 'iommu-parent' property can be used, with MC bus
> itself providing the stream-id's (in the code execution via FW).
> 
> We can also use the iommu-map property similar to PCI, which will require u-boot
> fixup. But then it leads to little bit complications of u-boot - kernel compatibility.

What needs fixing up? With a stream-map-mask in place to ignore the 
upper Stream ID bits, you just need:

	iommu-map = <0 &smmu 0 0x80>;

to say that the lower bits of the ICID value map directly to the lower 
bits of the Stream ID value - that's the same fixed property of the 
hardware that you're wanting to assume in iommu-parent.

> If you suggest we can re-use the iommu-map property. What is your opinion?

I think it makes a lot more sense to directly use the property which 
already exists, than to introduce a new one to merely assume one 
hard-coded value of the existing one. Extending msi-parent to msi-map 
was a case of "oops, it turns out we need more flexibility here"; for 
the case of iommu-map I can't imagine any justification for saying 
"oops, we need less flexibility here" (saving 9 whole bytes in the DT 
really is irrelevant).

Robin.