On 22/10/2022 03:59, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
On 21/10/2022 12:55, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote:
Add missing compatibles used for Adreno SMMU on sc7280 and sm8450
platforms and for the Qualcomm v2 SMMU used on SDM630 platform.
Signed-off-by: Dmitry Baryshkov <dmitry.baryshkov@xxxxxxxxxx>
---
Documentation/devicetree/bindings/iommu/arm,smmu.yaml | 11 +++++++++++
1 file changed, 11 insertions(+)
diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/iommu/arm,smmu.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/iommu/arm,smmu.yaml
index 9066e6df1ba1..34ee33a62ba5 100644
--- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/iommu/arm,smmu.yaml
+++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/iommu/arm,smmu.yaml
@@ -28,6 +28,7 @@ properties:
- enum:
- qcom,msm8996-smmu-v2
- qcom,msm8998-smmu-v2
+ - qcom,sdm630-smmu-v2
So qcom,adreno-smmu is not compatible with Adreno? See below.
- const: qcom,smmu-v2
- description: Qcom SoCs implementing "arm,mmu-500"
@@ -48,10 +49,20 @@ properties:
- qcom,sm8350-smmu-500
- qcom,sm8450-smmu-500
- const: arm,mmu-500
+
+ - description: Qcom Adreno GPUs implementing "arm,smmu-500"
+ items:
+ - enum:
+ - qcom,sc7280-smmu-500
+ - qcom,sm8250-smmu-500
+ - const: qcom,adreno-smmu
+ - const: arm,mmu-500
- description: Qcom Adreno GPUs implementing "arm,smmu-v2"
items:
- enum:
+ - qcom,msm8996-smmu-v2
- qcom,sc7180-smmu-v2
+ - qcom,sdm630-smmu-v2
This does not look correct. The same compatible should not be present in
two different setups.
If qcom,msm8996-smmu-v2 is compatible with qcom,adreno-smmu, then your
first hunk is not correct.
Currently the qcom,adreno-smmu compat string is used as a flag, telling
the kernel that this SMMU instance needs some special setup to work with
Adreno GPU driver
For example, we have the following compat lists in the existing DT files:
- "qcom,msm8996-smmu-v2", "qcom,adreno-smmu", "qcom,smmu-v2"
- "qcom,msm8996-smmu-v2", "qcom,smmu-v2" // not handled by arm-qcom-smmu
- "qcom,sdm630-smmu-v2", "qcom,adreno-smmu", "qcom,smmu-v2"
- "qcom,sdm630-smmu-v2", "qcom,smmu-v2"
- "qcom,sdm845-smmu-v2", "qcom,adreno-smmu", "qcom,smmu-v2"
- "qcom,sdm845-smmu-500", "arm,mmu-500"
- "qcom,sdm845-smmu-v2", "qcom,smmu-v2" // special setup used on Cheza
- "qcom,sm8250-smmu-500", "qcom,adreno-smmu", "arm,mmu-500"
- "qcom,sm8250-smmu-500", "arm,mmu-500"
As we are trying to refactor the IOMMU bindings, what would be your
recommendation?
To introduce minimal changes, I wanted to have the following lists:
- "qcom,SOC-smmu-500", "qcom,adreno-smmu", "qcom,smmu-500", "arm,mmu-500"
- "qcom,SOC-smmu-500", "qcom,smmu-500", "arm,mmu-500"
However maybe you would prefer the following model:
- "qcom,SOC-adreno-smmu-500", "qcom,adreno-smmu-500", "arm,mmu-500"
- "qcom,SOC-smmu-500", "qcom,smmu-500", "arm,mmu-500"
Or:
- "qcom,SOC-smmu-500", "qcom,smmu-500", "arm,mmu-500" +
'qcom,adreno-smmu' flag/property?
- qcom,sdm845-smmu-v2
- const: qcom,adreno-smmu
- const: qcom,smmu-v2
Best regards,
Krzysztof
--
With best wishes
Dmitry
