[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAAFQd5AF5UVb35PEg+GjzLAqqr0q=Wg+XONRmK4XR=HLuJv2rA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 25 May 2015 15:31:48 +0900
From: Tomasz Figa <tfiga@...omium.org>
To: Yong Wu <yong.wu@...iatek.com>
Cc: Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>, Joerg Roedel <joro@...tes.org>,
Matthias Brugger <matthias.bgg@...il.com>,
Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@....com>,
Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>,
Daniel Kurtz <djkurtz@...gle.com>,
Lucas Stach <l.stach@...gutronix.de>,
Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
linux-mediatek@...ts.infradead.org,
Sasha Hauer <kernel@...gutronix.de>,
srv_heupstream@...iatek.com, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org"
<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
"open list:IOMMU DRIVERS" <iommu@...ts.linux-foundation.org>,
pebolle@...cali.nl, arnd@...db.de, mitchelh@...eaurora.org,
k.zhang@...iatek.com, youhua.li@...iatek.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/6] dt-bindings: iommu: Add binding for mediatek IOMMU
Hi,
Please see my comments inline.
On Fri, May 15, 2015 at 6:43 PM, Yong Wu <yong.wu@...iatek.com> wrote:
> This patch add mediatek iommu dts binding document.
>
> Signed-off-by: Yong Wu <yong.wu@...iatek.com>
> ---
> .../devicetree/bindings/iommu/mediatek,iommu.txt | 51 ++++++++++
> include/dt-bindings/iommu/mt8173-iommu-port.h | 112 +++++++++++++++++++++
> 2 files changed, 163 insertions(+)
> create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/iommu/mediatek,iommu.txt
> create mode 100644 include/dt-bindings/iommu/mt8173-iommu-port.h
>
> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/iommu/mediatek,iommu.txt b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/iommu/mediatek,iommu.txt
> new file mode 100644
> index 0000000..f2cc7c0
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/iommu/mediatek,iommu.txt
> @@ -0,0 +1,51 @@
> +/******************************************************/
> +/* Mediatek IOMMU Hardware Block Diagram */
> +/******************************************************/
nit: Could you follow one of existing styles of DT binding
documentation? You might be able to use [1] as an example.
[1] http://lxr.free-electrons.com/source/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/iommu/arm,smmu.txt
.
> + EMI (External Memory Interface)
> + |
> + m4u (Multimedia Memory Management Unit)
> + |
> + smi (Smart Multimedia Interface)
> + |
> + +---------------+-------
> + | |
> + | |
> + vdec larb disp larb ... SoCs have different local arbiter(larb).
> + | |
> + | |
> + +----+----+ +-----+-----+
> + | | | | | | ...
> + | | | | | | ...
> + | | | | | | ...
> + MC PP VLD OVL0 RDMA0 WDMA0 ... There are different ports in each larb.
> +
This diagram is still quite meaningless without proper description of
all the functionality off all the blocks and interfaces between them.
> +Required properties:
> +- compatible : must be "mediatek,mt8173-m4u".
> +- reg : m4u register base and size.
> +- interrupts : the interrupt of m4u.
> +- clocks : must contain one entry for each clock-names.
> +- clock-names : must be "bclk", It is the block clock of m4u.
> +- larb-portes-nr : must contain the number of the portes for each larb(local
> + arbiter). The number is defined in dt-binding/iommu/mt8173-iommu-port.h.
typo: Should it be "ports" instead of "portes"?
Anyway, shouldn't this be a property of larb nodes? I.e. the larb0
node would have a port-count property set to M4U_LARB0_PORT_NR.
> +- larb : must contain the local arbiters of the current platform. Refer to
> + bindings/soc/mediatek/mediatek,smi.txt. It must sort according to the
> + local arbiter index, like larb0, larb1, larb2...
> +- iommu-cells : must be 1. Specifies the client PortID as defined in
> + dt-binding/iommu/mt8173-iommu-port.h
Looking at the driver, wouldn't a 2 cell system be more appropriate
here? With first cell indexing the larbs and second the ports within
that larb.
[snip]
> +#define M4U_LARB0_PORT_NR 8
> +#define M4U_LARB1_PORT_NR 10
> +#define M4U_LARB2_PORT_NR 21
> +#define M4U_LARB3_PORT_NR 15
> +#define M4U_LARB4_PORT_NR 6
> +#define M4U_LARB5_PORT_NR 9
> +
> +#define M4U_LARB0_PORT(n) (n)
> +#define M4U_LARB1_PORT(n) ((n) + M4U_LARB0_PORT_NR + M4U_LARB0_PORT(0))
> +#define M4U_LARB2_PORT(n) ((n) + M4U_LARB1_PORT_NR + M4U_LARB1_PORT(0))
> +#define M4U_LARB3_PORT(n) ((n) + M4U_LARB2_PORT_NR + M4U_LARB2_PORT(0))
> +#define M4U_LARB4_PORT(n) ((n) + M4U_LARB3_PORT_NR + M4U_LARB3_PORT(0))
> +#define M4U_LARB5_PORT(n) ((n) + M4U_LARB4_PORT_NR + M4U_LARB4_PORT(0))
This looks like some artificial indexing. Does it have any
correspondence with actual hardware configuration?
> +
> +/* larb0 */
> +#define M4U_PORT_DISP_OVL0 M4U_LARB0_PORT(0)
> +#define M4U_PORT_DISP_RDMA0 M4U_LARB0_PORT(1)
> +#define M4U_PORT_DISP_WDMA0 M4U_LARB0_PORT(2)
[snip]
> +#define M4U_PORT_VENC_CUR_CHROMA_SET2 M4U_LARB5_PORT(6)
> +#define M4U_PORT_VENC_RD_COMA_SET2 M4U_LARB5_PORT(7)
> +#define M4U_PORT_VENC_SV_COMA_SET2 M4U_LARB5_PORT(8)
This convinces me even more that this binding actually needs
#iommu-cells to be 2 and the indexing system I described above.
Best regards,
Tomasz
--
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