On Fri, Jul 12, 2024 at 04:28:37PM +0100, Robin Murphy wrote: > On 12/07/2024 4:24 pm, Jon Hunter wrote: > > > > On 12/07/2024 12:48, Robin Murphy wrote: > > > > ... > > > > > > I am seeing some failures on -next with some of our devices. > > > > Bisect is pointing to this commit. Looks like the host1x device > > > > is no longer probing successfully. I see the following ... > > > > > > > > tegra-host1x 50000000.host1x: failed to initialize fwspec: -517 > > > > nouveau 57000000.gpu: failed to initialize fwspec: -517 > > > > > > > > The probe seems to be deferred forever. The above is seen on > > > > Tegra210 but Tegra30 and Tegra194 are also having the same > > > > problem. Interestingly it is not all devices and so make me > > > > wonder if we are missing something on these devices? Let me know > > > > if you have any thoughts. > > > > > > Ugh, tegra-smmu has been doing a complete nonsense this whole time - > > > on closer inspection, it's passing the fwnode of the *client device* > > > where it should be that of the IOMMU device :( > > > > > > I *think* it should probably just be a case of: > > > > > > - err = iommu_fwspec_init(dev, of_fwnode_handle(dev->of_node)); > > > + err = iommu_fwspec_init(dev, of_fwnode_handle(smmu->dev->of_node)); > > > > > > since smmu->dev appears to be the same one initially passed to > > > iommu_device_register(), so it at least ought to match and work, but > > > the SMMU device vs. MC device thing leaves me mildly wary of how > > > correct it might be overall. > > > > > > (Also now I'm wondering why I didn't just use dev_fwnode() there...) > > > > > > Yes making that change in the tegra-smmu driver does fix it. > > Ace, thanks for confirming! I was just writing a follow-up to say that I've > pretty much convinced myself that this (proper diff below) should in fact be > the right thing to do in general as well :) > > Will, Joerg, would you prefer to have a standalone fix patch for the > nvidia/tegra branch to then re-merge fwspec-ops-removal and fix up the > conflict, or just a patch on top of fwspec-ops-removal as below? I've just fixed it locally on the tegra branch, so I'll then just resolve the conflict with fwspec-ops-removal the right way. That way, we can backport the thing if we need to. Cheers, Will
