linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/6] Docs: dt: add fsl-mc iommu-parent device-tree binding

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: <f382e92a-8ab5-7c93-1f39-fe6797e5c876@arm.com>
Date:   Mon, 5 Mar 2018 15:37:29 +0000
From:   Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@....com>
To:     Nipun Gupta <nipun.gupta@....com>,
        "will.deacon@....com" <will.deacon@....com>,
        "mark.rutland@....com" <mark.rutland@....com>,
        "catalin.marinas@....com" <catalin.marinas@....com>
Cc:     "iommu@...ts.linux-foundation.org" <iommu@...ts.linux-foundation.org>,
        "robh+dt@...nel.org" <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
        "hch@....de" <hch@....de>,
        "m.szyprowski@...sung.com" <m.szyprowski@...sung.com>,
        "gregkh@...uxfoundation.org" <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        "joro@...tes.org" <joro@...tes.org>, Leo Li <leoyang.li@....com>,
        "shawnguo@...nel.org" <shawnguo@...nel.org>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "devicetree@...r.kernel.org" <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org" 
        <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
        "linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org" <linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org>,
        Bharat Bhushan <bharat.bhushan@....com>,
        "stuyoder@...il.com" <stuyoder@...il.com>,
        Laurentiu Tudor <laurentiu.tudor@....com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/6] Docs: dt: add fsl-mc iommu-parent device-tree binding

On 05/03/18 15:00, Nipun Gupta wrote:
> 
> 
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Robin Murphy [mailto:robin.murphy@....com]
>> Sent: Monday, March 05, 2018 20:23
>> To: Nipun Gupta <nipun.gupta@....com>; will.deacon@....com;
>> mark.rutland@....com; catalin.marinas@....com
>> Cc: iommu@...ts.linux-foundation.org; robh+dt@...nel.org; hch@....de;
>> m.szyprowski@...sung.com; gregkh@...uxfoundation.org; joro@...tes.org;
>> Leo Li <leoyang.li@....com>; shawnguo@...nel.org; linux-
>> kernel@...r.kernel.org; devicetree@...r.kernel.org; linux-arm-
>> kernel@...ts.infradead.org; linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org; Bharat Bhushan
>> <bharat.bhushan@....com>; stuyoder@...il.com; Laurentiu Tudor
>> <laurentiu.tudor@....com>
>> Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/6] Docs: dt: add fsl-mc iommu-parent device-tree binding
>>
>> On 05/03/18 14:29, Nipun Gupta wrote:
>>> The existing IOMMU bindings cannot be used to specify the relationship
>>> between fsl-mc devices and IOMMUs. This patch adds a binding for
>>> mapping fsl-mc devices to IOMMUs, using a new iommu-parent property.
>>
>> Given that allowing "msi-parent" for #msi-cells > 1 is merely a
>> backward-compatibility bodge full of hard-coded assumptions, why would
>> we want to knowingly introduce a similarly unpleasant equivalent for
>> IOMMUs? What's wrong with "iommu-map"?
> 
> Hi Robin,
> 
> With 'msi-parent' the property is fixed up to have msi-map. In this case there is
> no fixup required and simple 'iommu-parent' property can be used, with MC bus
> itself providing the stream-id's (in the code execution via FW).
> 
> We can also use the iommu-map property similar to PCI, which will require u-boot
> fixup. But then it leads to little bit complications of u-boot - kernel compatibility.

What needs fixing up? With a stream-map-mask in place to ignore the 
upper Stream ID bits, you just need:

	iommu-map = <0 &smmu 0 0x80>;

to say that the lower bits of the ICID value map directly to the lower 
bits of the Stream ID value - that's the same fixed property of the 
hardware that you're wanting to assume in iommu-parent.

> If you suggest we can re-use the iommu-map property. What is your opinion?

I think it makes a lot more sense to directly use the property which 
already exists, than to introduce a new one to merely assume one 
hard-coded value of the existing one. Extending msi-parent to msi-map 
was a case of "oops, it turns out we need more flexibility here"; for 
the case of iommu-map I can't imagine any justification for saying 
"oops, we need less flexibility here" (saving 9 whole bytes in the DT 
really is irrelevant).

Robin.