On 30/10/2024 1:14 pm, Bibek Kumar Patro wrote:
On 10/29/2024 6:59 PM, Robin Murphy wrote:
On 2024-10-08 1:54 pm, Bibek Kumar Patro wrote:
Add an adreno-smmu-priv interface for drm/msm to call
into arm-smmu-qcom and initiate the PRR bit setup or reset
sequence as per request.
This will be used by GPU to setup the PRR bit and related
configuration registers through adreno-smmu private
interface instead of directly poking the smmu hardware.
Suggested-by: Rob Clark <robdclark@xxxxxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: Bibek Kumar Patro <quic_bibekkum@xxxxxxxxxxx>
---
drivers/iommu/arm/arm-smmu/arm-smmu-qcom.c | 37 ++++++++++++++++++++++
drivers/iommu/arm/arm-smmu/arm-smmu.h | 2 ++
include/linux/adreno-smmu-priv.h | 10 +++++-
3 files changed, 48 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/drivers/iommu/arm/arm-smmu/arm-smmu-qcom.c b/drivers/
iommu/arm/arm-smmu/arm-smmu-qcom.c
index 6e0a2a43e45a..38ac9cab763b 100644
--- a/drivers/iommu/arm/arm-smmu/arm-smmu-qcom.c
+++ b/drivers/iommu/arm/arm-smmu/arm-smmu-qcom.c
@@ -25,6 +25,7 @@
#define CPRE (1 << 1)
#define CMTLB (1 << 0)
+#define GFX_ACTLR_PRR (1 << 5)
static struct qcom_smmu *to_qcom_smmu(struct arm_smmu_device *smmu)
{
@@ -109,6 +110,40 @@ static void
qcom_adreno_smmu_resume_translation(const void *cookie, bool termina
arm_smmu_cb_write(smmu, cfg->cbndx, ARM_SMMU_CB_RESUME, reg);
}
+static void qcom_adreno_smmu_set_prr_bit(const void *cookie, bool set)
+{
+ struct arm_smmu_domain *smmu_domain = (void *)cookie;
+ struct arm_smmu_device *smmu = smmu_domain->smmu;
+ const struct device_node *np = smmu->dev->of_node;
+ struct arm_smmu_cfg *cfg = &smmu_domain->cfg;
+ u32 reg = 0;
+
+ if (of_device_is_compatible(np, "qcom,smmu-500") &&
+ of_device_is_compatible(np, "qcom,adreno-smmu")) {
These conditions aren't going to change between calls - wouldn't it
make more sense to conditionally assign the callbacks in the first
place? Not the biggest deal if this is a one-off context-setup type
thing, just that it looks a little funky.
Let me know if you want to pursue this still.
From the current PRR implementation in the graphics
vendor layer, this seems to be just setup kind-of thing.
Also if we keep this conditional check before assigning callbacks,
and vendor layer caller won't be having any such check,
wouldn't it be an issue in unsupported platforms (!qcom,smmu-500 or
!qcom,adreno-smmu)
as the callbacks won't be assigned?
So as per my understanding I think it would be safe to keep the
condition check here?
Like I say, it makes more sense to me personally if SMMUs which don't
have a PRR don't offer a callback for setting the PRR which they don't
have, and for it to be the caller's responsibility not to call a NULL
callback where they wouldn't need to call one anyway. But the
adreno_priv interface is kind of Rob's thing, so I'll leave it to his
preference.
Thanks,
Robin.
