linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v4] acpi/iort: numa: Add numa node mapping for smmuv3 devices

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20170803135213.GA11451@red-moon>
Date:   Thu, 3 Aug 2017 14:52:13 +0100
From:   Lorenzo Pieralisi <lorenzo.pieralisi@....com>
To:     Hanjun Guo <guohanjun@...wei.com>
Cc:     Robert Richter <robert.richter@...ium.com>,
        Ganapatrao Kulkarni <ganapatrao.kulkarni@...ium.com>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
        linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org, iommu@...ts.linux-foundation.org,
        Will.Deacon@....com, hanjun.guo@...aro.org, sudeep.holla@....com,
        robin.murphy@....com, lv.zheng@...el.com, joro@...tes.org,
        rjw@...ysocki.net, lenb@...nel.org, jnair@...iumnetworks.com,
        gklkml16@...il.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4] acpi/iort: numa: Add numa node mapping for smmuv3
 devices

On Thu, Aug 03, 2017 at 09:35:45PM +0800, Hanjun Guo wrote:
> On 2017/8/3 0:21, Lorenzo Pieralisi wrote:
> > Patch that I will send upstream below, please check, thanks.
> >
> > -- >8 --
> > Subject: [PATCH] ACPI/IORT: numa: Add numa node mapping for smmuv3 devices
> >
> > ARM IORT specification(rev. C) has added  provision to define proximity
> > domain in SMMUv3 IORT table. Adding required code to parse Proximity
> > domain and set numa_node of smmv3 platform devices.
> >
> > Add code to parse proximity domain in SMMUv3 IORT table to
> > set numa node mapping for smmuv3 devices.
> >
> > Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20170706112017.GA16981@rric.localdomain
> > Signed-off-by: Ganapatrao Kulkarni <ganapatrao.kulkarni@...ium.com>
> > [lorenzo.pieralisi@....com: updated review comments]
> > Signed-off-by: Lorenzo Pieralisi <lorenzo.pieralisi@....com>
> > ---
> >  drivers/acpi/arm64/iort.c | 29 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
> >  1 file changed, 28 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/acpi/arm64/iort.c b/drivers/acpi/arm64/iort.c
> > index a3215ee..35dd803 100644
> > --- a/drivers/acpi/arm64/iort.c
> > +++ b/drivers/acpi/arm64/iort.c
> > @@ -908,6 +908,27 @@ static bool __init arm_smmu_v3_is_coherent(struct acpi_iort_node *node)
> >  	return smmu->flags & ACPI_IORT_SMMU_V3_COHACC_OVERRIDE;
> >  }
> >  
> > +#if defined(CONFIG_ACPI_NUMA) && defined(ACPI_IORT_SMMU_v3_PXM_VALID)
> 
> Typo here, s/v3/V3, wit this typo, smmu proximity callback will be set to NULL.
> 
> > +/*
> > + * set numa proximity domain for smmuv3 device
> > + */
> > +static void  __init arm_smmu_v3_set_proximity(struct device *dev,
> > +					      struct acpi_iort_node *node)
> > +{
> > +	struct acpi_iort_smmu_v3 *smmu;
> > +
> > +	smmu = (struct acpi_iort_smmu_v3 *)node->node_data;
> > +	if (smmu->flags & ACPI_IORT_SMMU_V3_PXM_VALID) {
> > +		set_dev_node(dev, acpi_map_pxm_to_node(smmu->pxm));
> > +		dev_info(dev, "SMMUV3[%llx] Mapped to Proximity domain %d\n",
> > +			smmu->base_address,
> > +			smmu->pxm);
> 
> Here I got:
> 
> [    5.074246]  (null): SMMUV3[a0040000] Mapped to Proximity domain 0
> [    5.074296]  (null): SMMUV3[700a0040000] Mapped to Proximity domain 2
> [    5.074319]  (null): SMMUV3[c0040000] Mapped to Proximity domain 0
> [    5.074344]  (null): SMMUV3[8a0040000] Mapped to Proximity domain 1
> [    5.074368]  (null): SMMUV3[600a0040000] Mapped to Proximity domain 2
> 
> SMMU is probed via static table (IORT) , so no proper name before it
> fully probed.
> 
> Can we just use pr_info here to remove the meaningless (null), or
> we give the SMMU a proper name?

Yes on both counts, Ganapatrao sent me offline a fixed-up patch that I
will send upstream with the two changes you requested.

Thanks for checking anyway.

Lorenzo

> 
> Thanks
> Hanjun
> 
> > +	}
> > +}
> > +#else
> > +#define arm_smmu_v3_set_proximity NULL
> > +#endif
> > +
> >  static int __init arm_smmu_count_resources(struct acpi_iort_node *node)
> >  {
> >  	struct acpi_iort_smmu *smmu;
> > @@ -977,13 +998,16 @@ struct iort_iommu_config {
> >  	int (*iommu_count_resources)(struct acpi_iort_node *node);
> >  	void (*iommu_init_resources)(struct resource *res,
> >  				     struct acpi_iort_node *node);
> > +	void (*iommu_set_proximity)(struct device *dev,
> > +				    struct acpi_iort_node *node);
> >  };
> >  
> >  static const struct iort_iommu_config iort_arm_smmu_v3_cfg __initconst = {
> >  	.name = "arm-smmu-v3",
> >  	.iommu_is_coherent = arm_smmu_v3_is_coherent,
> >  	.iommu_count_resources = arm_smmu_v3_count_resources,
> > -	.iommu_init_resources = arm_smmu_v3_init_resources
> > +	.iommu_init_resources = arm_smmu_v3_init_resources,
> > +	.iommu_set_proximity = arm_smmu_v3_set_proximity,
> >  };
> >  
> >  static const struct iort_iommu_config iort_arm_smmu_cfg __initconst = {
> > @@ -1028,6 +1052,9 @@ static int __init iort_add_smmu_platform_device(struct acpi_iort_node *node)
> >  	if (!pdev)
> >  		return -ENOMEM;
> >  
> > +	if (ops->iommu_set_proximity)
> > +		ops->iommu_set_proximity(&pdev->dev, node);
> > +
> >  	count = ops->iommu_count_resources(node);
> >  
> >  	r = kcalloc(count, sizeof(*r), GFP_KERNEL);
> 
> 
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-acpi" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html