On Wed, Jun 26, 2019 at 8:18 PM Will Deacon <will@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Wed, Jun 26, 2019 at 12:03:02PM +0530, Vivek Gautam wrote: > > On Tue, Jun 25, 2019 at 7:09 PM Will Deacon <will@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > > On Tue, Jun 25, 2019 at 12:34:56PM +0530, Vivek Gautam wrote: > > > > On Mon, Jun 24, 2019 at 10:33 PM Will Deacon <will@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > Instead, I think this needs to be part of a separate file that is maintained > > > > > by you, which follows on from the work that Krishna is doing for nvidia > > > > > built on top of Robin's prototype patches: > > > > > > > > > > http://linux-arm.org/git?p=linux-rm.git;a=shortlog;h=refs/heads/iommu/smmu-impl > > > > > > > > Looking at this branch quickly, it seem there can be separate implementation > > > > level configuration file that can be added. > > > > But will this also handle separate page table ops when required in future. > > > > > > Nothing's set in stone, but having the implementation-specific code > > > constrain the page-table format (especially wrt quirks) sounds reasonable to > > > me. I'm currently waiting for Krishna to respin the nvidia changes [1] on > > > top of this so that we can see how well the abstractions are holding up. > > > > Sure. Would you want me to try Robin's branch and take out the qualcomm > > related stuff to its own implementation? Or, would you like me to respin this > > series so that you can take it in to enable SDM845 boards such as, MTP > > and dragonboard to have a sane build - debian, etc. so people benefit > > out of it. > > I can't take this series without Acks on the firmware calling changes, and I > plan to send my 5.3 patches to Joerg at the end of the week so they get some > time in -next. In which case, I think it may be worth you having a play with > the branch above so we can get a better idea of any additional smmu_impl hooks > you may need. Cool. I will play around with it and get something tangible and meaningful. > > > Qualcomm stuff is lying in qcom-smmu and arm-smmu and may take some > > time to stub out the implementation related details. > > Not sure I follow you here. Are you talking about qcom_iommu.c? That's right. The qcom_iommu.c solved a different issue of secure context bank allocations, when Rob forked out this driver and reused some of the arm-smmu.c stuff. We will take a look at that once we start adding the qcom implementation. Thanks Vivek > > Will > _______________________________________________ > iommu mailing list > iommu@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/iommu -- QUALCOMM INDIA, on behalf of Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum, hosted by The Linux Foundation
