On Fri, Apr 28, 2017 at 02:14:49PM +0100, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
> On 28 April 2017 at 14:11, Will Deacon <will.deacon@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> > Hi Ard,
> >
> > [+ devicetree@]
> >
> > On Fri, Apr 14, 2017 at 01:43:15PM +0100, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
> >> DT nodes may have a status property, and if they do, such nodes should
> >> only be considered present if the status property is set to 'okay'.
> >>
> >> Currently, we call the init function of IOMMUs described by the device
> >> tree without taking this into account, which may result in the output
> >> below on systems where some SMMUs may be legally disabled.
> >>
> >> Failed to initialise IOMMU /smb/smmu@e0200000
> >> Failed to initialise IOMMU /smb/smmu@e0c00000
> >> arm-smmu e0a00000.smmu: probing hardware configuration...
> >> arm-smmu e0a00000.smmu: SMMUv1 with:
> >> arm-smmu e0a00000.smmu: stage 2 translation
> >> arm-smmu e0a00000.smmu: coherent table walk
> >> arm-smmu e0a00000.smmu: stream matching with 32 register groups, mask 0x7fff
> >> arm-smmu e0a00000.smmu: 8 context banks (8 stage-2 only)
> >> arm-smmu e0a00000.smmu: Supported page sizes: 0x60211000
> >> arm-smmu e0a00000.smmu: Stage-2: 40-bit IPA -> 40-bit PA
> >> Failed to initialise IOMMU /smb/smmu@e0600000
> >> Failed to initialise IOMMU /smb/smmu@e0800000
> >>
> >> Since this is not an error condition, only call the init function if
> >> the device is enabled, which also inhibits the spurious error messages.
> >>
> >> Signed-off-by: Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel@xxxxxxxxxx>
> >> ---
> >> drivers/iommu/of_iommu.c | 2 +-
> >> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >>
> >> diff --git a/drivers/iommu/of_iommu.c b/drivers/iommu/of_iommu.c
> >> index 2683e9fc0dcf..2dd1206e6c0d 100644
> >> --- a/drivers/iommu/of_iommu.c
> >> +++ b/drivers/iommu/of_iommu.c
> >> @@ -183,7 +183,7 @@ static int __init of_iommu_init(void)
> >> for_each_matching_node_and_match(np, matches, &match) {
> >> const of_iommu_init_fn init_fn = match->data;
> >>
> >> - if (init_fn(np))
> >> + if (of_device_is_available(np) && init_fn(np))
> >> pr_err("Failed to initialise IOMMU %s\n",
> >> of_node_full_name(np));
> >> }
> >
> > Is there a definition of what status = "disabled" is supposed to mean for an
> > IOMMU? For example, that could mean that the firmware has pre-programmed the
> > SMMU with particular translations or memory attributes (a bit like the
> > CCA=1, CPM=1, DACS=0 case in ACPI IORT), or even disabled DMA traffic
> > altogether.
> >
> > So I think we'd need an update to the generic IOMMU binding text to say
> > exactly what the semantics are supposed to be here.
> >
>
> I agree that it might make sense to describe the behavior of the IOMMU
> when it is left in the state we found it in. But that is not the same
> as status=disabled.
>
> The DTS subtree contains loads and loads of boilerplate
> configurations, where only some pieces are enabled in the final image
> by setting status=okay. So a node that has status 'disabled' should be
> treated as 'not present', not as 'present but can be ignored under
> assumptions such and such'
>
> In other words, I think we are talking about two different issues here.
I'm not so sure... if we have a master device that has an iommus= property
pointing to an IOMMU with status="disabled", I really don't know whether we
should:
1. Assume the master can do DMA with a 1:1 mapping of memory and no
changes to memory attributes
2. Assume the master can do DMA with a 1:1 mapping of memory, but
potentially with changes to the attributes
3. Assume the master can do DMA, but with some pre-existing translation
(what?)
4. Assume the master can't do DMA
and I also don't know whether the "dma-coherent" property remains valid.
Will
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe devicetree" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
