[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20140616125704.GE16758@arm.com>
Date: Mon, 16 Jun 2014 13:57:04 +0100
From: Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>
To: Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@...il.com>
Cc: Dave P Martin <Dave.Martin@....com>,
Stephen Warren <swarren@...dotorg.org>,
Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
Pawel Moll <Pawel.Moll@....com>,
Mark Rutland <Mark.Rutland@....com>,
Ian Campbell <ijc+devicetree@...lion.org.uk>,
Kumar Gala <galak@...eaurora.org>,
Cho KyongHo <pullip.cho@...sung.com>,
Grant Grundler <grundler@...omium.org>,
Marc Zyngier <Marc.Zyngier@....com>,
Joerg Roedel <joro@...tes.org>,
Hiroshi Doyu <hdoyu@...dia.com>,
"devicetree@...r.kernel.org" <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
"iommu@...ts.linux-foundation.org" <iommu@...ts.linux-foundation.org>,
"linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org"
<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
"linux-tegra@...r.kernel.org" <linux-tegra@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-samsung-soc@...r.kernel.org"
<linux-samsung-soc@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] devicetree: Add generic IOMMU device tree bindings
On Wed, Jun 04, 2014 at 10:12:38PM +0100, Thierry Reding wrote:
> On Fri, May 30, 2014 at 12:27:28PM +0100, Dave Martin wrote:
> > On Fri, May 30, 2014 at 08:30:08AM +0100, Thierry Reding wrote:
> [...]
> > > Arnd, can you take another look at this binding and see if there's
> > > anything else missing? If not I'll go through the document again and
> > > update all #address-cells/#size-cells references with #iommu-cells as
> > > appropriate and submit v3.
> >
> > How do you envisage propagation of the master ID bits downstream of the
> > IOMMU would be described?
> >
> > We will definitely need a way to describe this for GICv3. How those
> > values are propagated is likely to vary between related SoCs and doesn't
> > feel like it should be baked into a driver, especially for the ARM SMMU
> > which may get reused in radically different SoC families from different
> > vendors.
>
> Well, we've had cases like these in the past (power sequences come to
> mind). Some concepts are just too difficult or unwieldy to be put into
> device tree. I think that this is one of them.
>
> > The most likely types of remapping are the adding of a base offset or
> > some extra bits to the ID -- because not all MSIs to the GIC will
> > necessarily pass through the IOMMU. It's also possible that we might
> > see ID squashing or folding in some systems.
>
> It can easily be argued that if the algorithm used to remap the ID
> varies, the compatibility of the device changes. Therefore I would
> expect any variant of the GICv3 that deviates from the "standard"
> mapping (if there is such a thing) to have its own compatible string.
There is no standard mapping; it's a property defined at system integration
time. I fully expect different SoCs to do different things here.
Will
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists