On 1/11/24 19:09, Bibek Kumar Patro wrote:
On 1/10/2024 11:26 PM, Konrad Dybcio wrote:
On 1/10/24 13:55, Bibek Kumar Patro wrote:
On 1/10/2024 4:46 PM, Bibek Kumar Patro wrote:
On 1/10/2024 9:36 AM, Pavan Kondeti wrote:
[...]
@@ -274,6 +321,21 @@ static const struct of_device_id qcom_smmu_client_of_match[] __maybe_unused = {
static int qcom_smmu_init_context(struct arm_smmu_domain *smmu_domain,
struct io_pgtable_cfg *pgtbl_cfg, struct device *dev)
{
+ struct arm_smmu_device *smmu = smmu_domain->smmu;
+ struct qcom_smmu *qsmmu = to_qcom_smmu(smmu);
+ const struct actlr_variant *actlrvar;
+ int cbndx = smmu_domain->cfg.cbndx;
+
+ if (qsmmu->data->actlrvar) {
+ actlrvar = qsmmu->data->actlrvar;
+ for (; actlrvar->io_start; actlrvar++) {
+ if (actlrvar->io_start == smmu->ioaddr) {
+ qcom_smmu_set_actlr(dev, smmu, cbndx, actlrvar->actlrcfg);
+ break;
+ }
+ }
+ }
+
This block and the one in qcom_adreno_smmu_init_context() are exactly
the same. Possible to do some refactoring?
I will check if this repeated blocks can be accomodated this into qcom_smmu_set_actlr function if that would be fine.
Also adding to this, this might increase the number of indentation inside qcom_smmu_set_actlr as well, to around 5. So wouldn't this
be an issue?
By the way, we can refactor this:
if (qsmmu->data->actlrvar) {
actlrvar = qsmmu->data->actlrvar;
for (; actlrvar->io_start; actlrvar++) {
if (actlrvar->io_start == smmu->ioaddr) {
qcom_smmu_set_actlr(dev, smmu, cbndx, actlrvar->actlrcfg);
break;
}
}
}
into
// add const u8 num_actlrcfgs to struct actrl_variant to
// save on sentinel space:
// sizeof(u8) < sizeof(ptr) + sizeof(resource_size_t)
Git it, Would it be better to add this in struct qcom_smmu_match_data ?
Yes, right.
Posted a sample below.
[declarations]
const struct actlr_variant *actlrvar = qsmmu->data->actlrvar;
int i;
[rest of the functions]
if (!actlrvar)
return 0;
> for (i = 0; i < actrlvar->num_actrlcfgs; i++) {
if (actlrvar[i].io_start == smmu->ioaddr) {
qcom_smmu_set_actlr(dev, smmu, cbndx, actlrvar->actlrcfg);
break;
}
}
> Saving both on .TEXT size and indentation levels :)
Thanks for this suggestion Konrad, will try to implement this, as it would reduce the indent levels to good extent.
Would something like this be okay?
static int qcom_smmu_init_context(struct arm_smmu_domain *smmu_domain,
struct qcom_smmu *qsmmu = to_qcom_smmu(smmu);
const struct actlr_variant *actlrvar;
int cbndx = smmu_domain->cfg.cbndx;
+ int i;
+ actlrvar = qsmmu->data->actlrvar;
+
+ if (!actlrvar)
+ goto end;
+
+ for (i = 0; i < qsmmu->data->num_smmu ; i++) {
+ if (actlrvar[i].io_start == smmu->ioaddr) {
+ qcom_smmu_set_actlr(dev, smmu, cbndx,
+ actlrvar[i].actlrcfg);
+ break;
}
}
+end:
smmu_domain->cfg.flush_walk_prefer_tlbiasid = true;
If you move this assignment before the actlrvar checking (there's no
dependency between them), you will get rid of the goto.
I also noticed that qcom_smmu_match_data.actlrvar could likely be
const struct actlr_variant * const (const pointer to a const
resource), similarly for actlr_variant.actlrcfg
Konrad
