Hi Geert-san,
> From: Geert Uytterhoeven, Sent: Tuesday, July 14, 2020 9:40 PM
>
> Hi Shimoda-san,
>
> On Tue, Jul 14, 2020 at 1:42 PM Yoshihiro Shimoda
> <yoshihiro.shimoda.uh@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > From: Geert Uytterhoeven, Sent: Tuesday, July 14, 2020 5:42 PM
> > > On Tue, Jul 14, 2020 at 10:30 AM Lad, Prabhakar
> > > <prabhakar.csengg@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > > On Tue, Jul 14, 2020 at 9:09 AM Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > > > On Mon, Jul 13, 2020 at 11:35 PM Lad Prabhakar
> > > > Also the recent patch to add
> > > > "r8a77961" just adds to soc_rcar_gen3_whitelist.
> > >
> > > Oops, commit 17fe16181639801b ("iommu/renesas: Add support for r8a77961")
> > > did it wrong, too.
> >
> > Thank you for the point it out. We should add r8a77961 to the soc_rcar_gen3[].
> > However, I don't know why I could not realize this issue...
> > So, I investigated this a little and then, IIUC, glob_match() which
> > soc_device_match() uses seems to return true, if *pat = "r8a7796" and *str = "r8a77961".
>
> Are you sure about this?
I'm very sorry. I completely misunderstood the glob_match() behavior.
And, now I understood why the current code can use IPMMU on r8a77961...
# Since the first soc_device_match() will return false, ipmmu_slave_whitelist()
# will return true and then the ipmmu_of_xlate() will be succeeded.
> I enabled CONFIG_GLOB_SELFTEST, and globtest succeeded.
> It does test glob_match("a", "aa"), which is a similar test.
>
> To be 100% sure, I added:
>
> --- a/lib/globtest.c
> +++ b/lib/globtest.c
> @@ -59,6 +59,7 @@ static char const glob_tests[] __initconst =
> "1" "a\0" "a\0"
> "0" "a\0" "b\0"
> "0" "a\0" "aa\0"
> + "0" "r8a7796\0" "r8a77961\0"
> "0" "a\0" "\0"
> "1" "\0" "\0"
> "0" "\0" "a\0"
>
> and it still succeeded.
I'm very sorry to waste your time about this...
Best regards,
Yoshihiro Shimoda
