Hi Robin, Thanks very much for your confirm. About the v3 of the DMA-mapping, I have some question below. On Fri, 2015-03-20 at 19:14 +0000, Robin Murphy wrote: > On 18/03/15 11:22, Yong Wu wrote: > > Hi Tomasz, > > Thanks very much for your review. please help check below. > > The others I will fix in the next version. > > > > Hi Robin, > > There are some place I would like you can have a look and give me > > some suggestion. > > > > On Wed, 2015-03-11 at 19:53 +0900, Tomasz Figa wrote: > >> Hi, > >> > >> Please find next part of my comments inline. > >> > >>> +/* > >>> + * pimudev is a global var for dma_alloc_coherent. > >>> + * It is not accepatable, we will delete it if "domain_alloc" is enabled > >> > >> It looks like we indeed need to use dma_alloc_coherent() and we don't > >> have a good way to pass the device pointer to domain_init callback. > >> > >> If you don't expect SoCs in the nearest future to have multiple M4U > >> blocks, then I guess this global variable could stay, after changing > >> the comment into an explanation why it's correct. Also it should be > >> moved to the top of the file, below #include directives, as this is > >> where usually global variables are located. > > @Robin, > > We have merged this patch[0] in order to delete the global var, But > > it seems that your patch of "arm64:IOMMU" isn't based on it right row. > > it will build fail. > > Yeah, I've not yet managed to try pulling in that series (much as I > approve of it), partly as I know doing so is going to lean towards a > not-insignificant rework and I'd rather avoid picking up more unmerged > dependencies to block getting _something_ in for arm64 (which we can > then improve). > > > > > [0]:http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/iommu/2015-January/011939.html > > [snip] > > Calling arch_setup_dma_ops() from the driver looks plain wrong, > especially given that you apparently attach the IOMMU to itself - if you > want your own domain you should use iommu_dma_create_domain(). I admit > that still leaves you having to dance around a bit in order to tear down > the automatic domains for now, but hopefully we'll get the core code > sorted out sooner rather than later. > >>> + > >>> + mtk_iommu_config_port(piommu, portid); > >>> + > >>> + if (i == 0) > >>> + dev->archdata.dma_ops = > >>> + piommu->dev->archdata.dma_ops; > >> > >> Shouldn't this be set automatically by IOMMU or DMA mapping core? > > @Robin, > > In the original "arm_iommu_attach_device" of arm/mm, it will call > > set_dma_ops to add iommu_ops for each iommu device. > > But iommu_dma_attach_device don't help this, so I have to add it here. > > Could this be improved? > > If you implemented a simple of_xlate callback so that the core code > handles the dma_ops as intended, I think the simplest cheat would be to > check the client device's domain, either on attachment or when they > start mapping/unmapping, and move them to your own domain if necessary. > I'm putting together a v3 of the DMA mapping series, so I'll have a look > to see if I can squeeze in a way to make that a bit less painful until > we solve it properly. > > > Robin. > I have implemented a simple of_xlate, but I can’t get the standard struct dma_map_ops “iommu_dma_ops” to assigned it to the client device. So the v3 of dma mapping will improve this issue? And Is the v3 of the DMA-mapping based on 4.0-rc1? because we expect it could contain will’s io-pagetable. And when the v3 will be ready? > >> > >>> + } > >>> + i++; > >>> + } > >>> + > >>> + spin_unlock_irqrestore(&priv->portlock, flags); > >>> + > >>> +imudev: > >>> + return 0; > >>> +} > >>> + > >>> +static void mtk_iommu_detach_device(struct iommu_domain *domain, > >>> + struct device *dev) > >>> +{ > >> > >> No hardware (de)configuration or clean-up necessary? > > I will add it. Actually we design like this:If a device have attached to > > iommu domain, it won't detach from it. > >> > >>> +} > >>> + > > [snip] -- 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