On Fri, Mar 9, 2018 at 6:04 PM, Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> 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?)
Yea, that sounds better.
regards
Vivek
>
> Robin.
>
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-arm-msm" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
--
QUALCOMM INDIA, on behalf of Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member
of Code Aurora Forum, hosted by The Linux Foundation
--
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
