Hi Rob,
>On Wed, Feb 1, 2017 at 10:23 AM, Rob Clark <robdclark@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> Before the driver is probed, arm_smmu_add_device() helpfully attaches
>> an IOMMU_DOMAIN_DMA domain. Which ofc does not support stalling, and
>> when the driver later attaches a domain that can_stall to an smmu that
>> can stall, the default _DMA domain prevents stalling from being enabled.
>> (And will cause further problems later)
>>
>> One simple way to deal with this is simply toss the default _DMA domain
>> if the driver attaches it's own domain.
>>
>> TODO maybe the tracking of list of attached domains should be done in
>> iommu core, so the detach can happen outside of group->mutex.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Rob Clark <robdclark@xxxxxxxxx>
>> ---
>> drivers/iommu/arm-smmu.c | 15 +++++++++++++++
>> 1 file changed, 15 insertions(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/iommu/arm-smmu.c b/drivers/iommu/arm-smmu.c
>> index 96a1be6..50bf135 100644
>> --- a/drivers/iommu/arm-smmu.c
>> +++ b/drivers/iommu/arm-smmu.c
>> @@ -1323,6 +1323,21 @@ static int arm_smmu_attach_dev(struct iommu_domain *domain, struct device *dev)
>>
>> smmu = fwspec_smmu(fwspec);
>>
>> + /*
>> + * If driver is explicitly managing the iommu, detatch any previously
>> + * attached _DMA domains.
>> + *
>> + * TODO maybe this logic should be in iommu_attach_device() so it can
>> + * happen outside of holding group->mutex??
>> + */
>> + if (domain->type != IOMMU_DOMAIN_DMA) {
>> + struct arm_smmu_domain *other_domain, *n;
>> +
>> + list_for_each_entry_safe(other_domain, n, &smmu->domain_list, domain_node)
>> + if (other_domain->domain.type == IOMMU_DOMAIN_DMA)
>> + arm_smmu_detach_dev(&other_domain->domain, dev);
>
So the arm_smmu_detach_dev api is no more there and is removed now.
Also this will be a problem when multiple devices share the iommu, we end up
removing domains used by other devices. Should this not be done
per-device which does not want to use the DMA domain ?
>hmm, we might want to unhook dev->archdata.dma_ops here too..
>
>I'm thinking maybe on arm64 __generic_dma_ops() should fall back to
>swiotlb ops instead of dummy_ops if archdata.dma_ops is NULL, so that
>we could just set it to NULL here?
>
hmm, both not attaching the default dma domain and not setting the dma_ops
is tried in this series as well [1]
[1] https://www.spinics.net/lists/arm-kernel/msg556081.html
>(Is there really any purpose for having the dummy-ops??)
>
To enforce setting arch_setup_dma_ops for device so that the
devices can do cache coherent transactions, otherwise disable the dma
capability of the device. I see that this was introduced as a part of
making ACPI_CCA_REQUIRED to be set in arm64 and later
generalized.
Regards,
Sricharan
>BR,
>-R
>
>> + }
>> +
>> if (WARN_ON(!list_empty(&smmu_domain->domain_node)))
>> return -EINVAL;
>>
>> --
>> 2.9.3
>>
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-arm-msm" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
