Hi All,
On 22/08/24 21:47, Mathieu Poirier wrote:
Hi Baolu,
Sorry for the late reply, this slipped through the cracks.
On Mon, Aug 12, 2024 at 03:28:11PM +0800, Lu Baolu wrote:
> An iommu domain is allocated in rproc_enable_iommu() and is attached to
> rproc->dev.parent in the same function.
>
> Use iommu_paging_domain_alloc() to make it explicit.
>
> Signed-off-by: Lu Baolu <baolu.lu@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Reviewed-by: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20240610085555.88197-13-baolu.lu@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> ---
> drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c | 6 +++---
> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c b/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c
> index f276956f2c5c..eb66f78ec8b7 100644
> --- a/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c
> +++ b/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c
> @@ -109,10 +109,10 @@ static int rproc_enable_iommu(struct rproc *rproc)
> return 0;
> }
>
> - domain = iommu_domain_alloc(dev->bus);
> - if (!domain) {
> + domain = iommu_paging_domain_alloc(dev);
I'm a little hesitant here. Function iommu_domain_alloc() passes NULL two the
second argument of __iommu_domain_alloc() while iommu_paging_domain_alloc()
provides a 'dev'. I don't have any HW to test on and I am not familiar enough
with the IOMMU subsystem to confidently more forward.
I am asking the Qualcomm (Bjorn and friends) and TI crew (Beleswar, Andrew,
Nishanth and Hari) to test this patch on their IOMMU devices and get back to me
with a "Tested-by".
Just a heads-up. Currently, I am seeing boot failures while booting
remotecores in TI's IOMMU devices with mainline kernel. Working on the
the fix, once it is done, will apply the above patch and test it ASAP.
Thanks,
Beleswar
Thanks,
Mathieu
> + if (IS_ERR(domain)) {
> dev_err(dev, "can't alloc iommu domain\n");
> - return -ENOMEM;
> + return PTR_ERR(domain);
> }
>
> iommu_set_fault_handler(domain, rproc_iommu_fault, rproc);
> --
> 2.34.1
>
