[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20170210152553.GJ7339@8bytes.org>
Date: Fri, 10 Feb 2017 16:25:53 +0100
From: Joerg Roedel <joro@...tes.org>
To: Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@....com>
Cc: Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>,
Lorenzo Pieralisi <lorenzo.pieralisi@....com>,
Alex Williamson <alex.williamson@...hat.com>,
David Woodhouse <dwmw2@...radead.org>,
iommu@...ts.linux-foundation.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Joerg Roedel <jroedel@...e.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 07/11] iommu/arm-smmu: Make use of the iommu_register
interface
On Fri, Feb 10, 2017 at 02:20:34PM +0000, Robin Murphy wrote:
> > @@ -1795,8 +1798,10 @@ static int arm_smmu_add_device(struct device *dev)
> > }
> >
> > group = iommu_group_get_for_dev(dev);
> > - if (!IS_ERR(group))
> > + if (!IS_ERR(group)) {
> > iommu_group_put(group);
> > + iommu_device_link(&smmu->iommu, dev);
>
> Given the coupling evident from this and the other patches, might it
> work to simply do the linking/unlinking automatically in
> iommu_group_{add,remove}_device()?
Yes, this is one of the goals too. But currently we don't have a generic
device->hw_iommu mapping in the iommu-code which would allow to call
the link/unlink functions in generic code too.
But changing this is one of the next things on my list :)
Joerg
Powered by blists - more mailing lists