Re: [PATCH v8 4/5] iommu/arm-smmu: Add the device_link between masters and smmu

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On 09/03/18 07:11, Vivek Gautam wrote:
On Thu, Mar 8, 2018 at 10:29 AM, Vivek Gautam
<vivek.gautam@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Wed, Mar 7, 2018 at 6:17 PM, Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@xxxxxxx> wrote:
On 02/03/18 10:10, Vivek Gautam wrote:

From: Sricharan R <sricharan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>

Finally add the device link between the master device and
smmu, so that the smmu gets runtime enabled/disabled only when the
master needs it. This is done from add_device callback which gets
called once when the master is added to the smmu.

Signed-off-by: Sricharan R <sricharan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: Vivek Gautam <vivek.gautam@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
---
   drivers/iommu/arm-smmu.c | 21 +++++++++++++++++++++
   1 file changed, 21 insertions(+)

diff --git a/drivers/iommu/arm-smmu.c b/drivers/iommu/arm-smmu.c
index 3d6a1875431f..bb1ea82c1003 100644
--- a/drivers/iommu/arm-smmu.c
+++ b/drivers/iommu/arm-smmu.c
@@ -217,6 +217,9 @@ struct arm_smmu_device {
         /* IOMMU core code handle */
         struct iommu_device             iommu;
+
+       /* runtime PM link to master */
+       struct device_link *link;


Just the one?

we will either have to count all the devices that are present on the
iommu bus, or
maintain a list to which all the links can be added.
But to add the list, we will have to initialize a LIST_HEAD in struct
device_link
as well.

Or, I think we don't even need to maintain a pointer to link with smmu.
In arm_smmu_remove_device(), we can find out the correct link, and delete it.

         list_for_each_entry(link, &dev->links.suppliers, c_node)
                 if (link->supplier == smmu->dev);
                            device_link_del(link);

Should that be fine?

Rafael, does the above snippet looks right to you? Context: smmu->dev
is the supplier, and dev is the consumer. We want to find the link,
and delete it.

Actually, looking at the existing code, it seems like device_link_add() will in fact look up and return any existing link between a given supplier and consumer - is that intentional API behaviour that users may rely on to avoid keeping track of explicit link pointers? (or conversely, might it be reasonable to factor out a device_link_find() function?)

Robin.
--
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



[Index of Archives]     [Device Tree Compilter]     [Device Tree Spec]     [Linux Driver Backports]     [Video for Linux]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Linux PCI Devel]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]     [XFree86]     [Yosemite Backpacking]


  Powered by Linux