Hi Robin,
On 01/17/2018 09:00 PM, Robin Murphy wrote:
> On 16/01/18 13:25, Jeffy Chen wrote:
>> There would be some masters sharing the same IOMMU device. Put them in
>> the same iommu group and share the same iommu domain.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Jeffy Chen <jeffy.chen at rock-chips.com>
>> ---
>>
>> Changes in v2: None
>>
>> drivers/iommu/rockchip-iommu.c | 39
>> +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--------
>> 1 file changed, 31 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/iommu/rockchip-iommu.c
>> b/drivers/iommu/rockchip-iommu.c
>> index c8de1456a016..6c316dd0dd2d 100644
>> --- a/drivers/iommu/rockchip-iommu.c
>> +++ b/drivers/iommu/rockchip-iommu.c
>> @@ -100,11 +100,13 @@ struct rk_iommu {
>> struct iommu_device iommu;
>> struct list_head node; /* entry in rk_iommu_domain.iommus */
>> struct iommu_domain *domain; /* domain to which iommu is
>> attached */
>> + struct iommu_group *group;
>> struct mutex pm_mutex; /* serializes power transitions */
>> };
>> struct rk_iommudata {
>> struct device_link *link; /* runtime PM link from IOMMU to
>> master */
>> + struct iommu_domain *domain; /* domain to which device is
>> attached */
>
> I don't see why this is needed - for example, mtk_iommu does the same
> thing without needing to track the active domain in more than one place.
>
> Fundamentally, for this kind of IOMMU without the notion of multiple
> translation contexts, the logic should look like:
>
> iommudrv_attach_device(dev, domain) {
> iommu = dev_get_iommu(dev);
> if (iommu->curr_domain != domain) {
> update_hw_state(iommu, domain);
> iommu->curr_domain = domain;
> }
> }
>
> which I think is essentially what you have anyway. When a group contains
> multiple devices, you update the IOMMU state for the first device, then
> calls for subsequent devices in the group do nothing since they see the
> IOMMU state is already up-to-date with the new domain.
>
right, will remove it.
> Robin.
