On Thu, 2022-06-09 at 12:08 +0200, AngeloGioacchino Del Regno wrote:
> On some SoCs (of which only MT8195 is supported at the time of
> writing),
> the "R" and "W" (I/O) enable bits for the IOMMUs are in the
> pericfg_ao
> register space and not in the IOMMU space: as it happened already
> with
> infracfg, it is expected that this list will grow.
Currently I don't see the list will grow. As commented before, In the
lastest SoC, The IOMMU enable bits for IOMMU will be in ATF, rather
than in this pericfg register region. In this case, Is this patch
unnecessary? or we could add this patch when there are 2 SoCs use this
setting at least? what's your opinion?
>
> Instead of specifying pericfg compatibles on a per-SoC basis,
> following
> what was done with infracfg, let's lookup the syscon by phandle
> instead.
>
> Signed-off-by: AngeloGioacchino Del Regno <
> angelogioacchino.delregno@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> drivers/iommu/mtk_iommu.c | 23 +++++++++++++----------
> 1 file changed, 13 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/iommu/mtk_iommu.c b/drivers/iommu/mtk_iommu.c
> index 90685946fcbe..0ea0848581e9 100644
> --- a/drivers/iommu/mtk_iommu.c
> +++ b/drivers/iommu/mtk_iommu.c
> @@ -138,6 +138,8 @@
> /* PM and clock always on. e.g. infra iommu */
> #define PM_CLK_AO BIT(15)
> #define IFA_IOMMU_PCIE_SUPPORT BIT(16)
> +/* IOMMU I/O (r/w) is enabled using PERICFG_IOMMU_1 register */
> +#define HAS_PERI_IOMMU1_REG BIT(17)
>
> #define MTK_IOMMU_HAS_FLAG_MASK(pdata, _x, mask) \
> ((((pdata)->flags) & (mask)) == (_x))
> @@ -187,7 +189,6 @@ struct mtk_iommu_plat_data {
> u32 flags;
> u32 inv_sel_reg;
>
> - char *pericfg_comp_str;
> struct list_head *hw_list;
> unsigned int iova_region_nr;
> const struct mtk_iommu_iova_region *iova_region;
> @@ -1218,14 +1219,16 @@ static int mtk_iommu_probe(struct
> platform_device *pdev)
> goto out_runtime_disable;
> }
> } else if (MTK_IOMMU_IS_TYPE(data->plat_data,
> MTK_IOMMU_TYPE_INFRA) &&
> - data->plat_data->pericfg_comp_str) {
> - infracfg = syscon_regmap_lookup_by_compatible(data-
> >plat_data->pericfg_comp_str);
> - if (IS_ERR(infracfg)) {
> - ret = PTR_ERR(infracfg);
> - goto out_runtime_disable;
> + MTK_IOMMU_HAS_FLAG(data->plat_data,
> HAS_PERI_IOMMU1_REG)) {
> + data->pericfg = syscon_regmap_lookup_by_phandle(dev-
> >of_node, "mediatek,pericfg");
> + if (IS_ERR(data->pericfg)) {
> + p = "mediatek,mt8195-pericfg_ao";
> + data->pericfg =
> syscon_regmap_lookup_by_compatible(p);
Upstream doesn't have the mt8195 iommu node currently, thus We don't
need to recover for the previous dts case. right?
> + if (IS_ERR(data->pericfg)) {
> + ret = PTR_ERR(data->pericfg);
> + goto out_runtime_disable;
> + }
> }
> -
> - data->pericfg = infracfg;
> }
>
> platform_set_drvdata(pdev, data);
> @@ -1484,8 +1487,8 @@ static const struct mtk_iommu_plat_data
> mt8192_data = {
> static const struct mtk_iommu_plat_data mt8195_data_infra = {
> .m4u_plat = M4U_MT8195,
> .flags = WR_THROT_EN | DCM_DISABLE | STD_AXI_MODE |
> PM_CLK_AO |
> - MTK_IOMMU_TYPE_INFRA |
> IFA_IOMMU_PCIE_SUPPORT,
> - .pericfg_comp_str = "mediatek,mt8195-pericfg_ao",
> + HAS_PERI_IOMMU1_REG | MTK_IOMMU_TYPE_INFRA
> |
> + IFA_IOMMU_PCIE_SUPPORT,
> .inv_sel_reg = REG_MMU_INV_SEL_GEN2,
> .banks_num = 5,
> .banks_enable = {true, false, false, false, true},
