Il 28/01/22 10:39, Yong Wu ha scritto:
On Thu, 2022-01-27 at 12:28 +0100, AngeloGioacchino Del Regno wrote:
Il 25/01/22 10:32, Yong Wu ha scritto:
Add mt8186 iommu supports.
Signed-off-by: Anan Sun <anan.sun@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: Yong Wu <yong.wu@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
---
drivers/iommu/mtk_iommu.c | 17 +++++++++++++++++
1 file changed, 17 insertions(+)
[snip]
static const struct mtk_iommu_plat_data mt8192_data = {
.m4u_plat = M4U_MT8192,
.flags = HAS_BCLK | HAS_SUB_COMM_2BITS |
OUT_ORDER_WR_EN |
@@ -1470,6 +1486,7 @@ static const struct of_device_id
mtk_iommu_of_ids[] = {
{ .compatible = "mediatek,mt8167-m4u", .data = &mt8167_data},
{ .compatible = "mediatek,mt8173-m4u", .data = &mt8173_data},
{ .compatible = "mediatek,mt8183-m4u", .data = &mt8183_data},
+ { .compatible = "mediatek,mt8186-iommu-mm", .data =
&mt8186_data_mm},
Hello!
Is there any particular reason why this compatible is not
"mediatek,mt8186-m4u"?
There is no special reason. In the previous SoC, We only support MM
IOMMU, it was called by "m4u". In the lastest SoC, We have the other
types IOMMU, like for INFRA masters and APU, thus they are called "mm
iommu", "infra iommu" and "apu iommu". Of course, "m4u" means "mm
iommu".
I suggest, at this point, to change it to "mediatek,mt8186-m4u" for naming
consistency with the other bindings and to avoid any kind of confusion.
Thank you!
Thanks,
Angelo
{ .compatible = "mediatek,mt8192-m4u", .data = &mt8192_data},
{ .compatible = "mediatek,mt8195-iommu-infra", .data =
&mt8195_data_infra},
{ .compatible = "mediatek,mt8195-iommu-vdo", .data =
&mt8195_data_vdo},
_______________________________________________
Linux-mediatek mailing list
Linux-mediatek@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-mediatek
