[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20181123183555.GE21183@arm.com>
Date: Fri, 23 Nov 2018 18:36:01 +0000
From: Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>
To: Vivek Gautam <vivek.gautam@...eaurora.org>
Cc: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
"open list:OPEN FIRMWARE AND FLATTENED DEVICE TREE BINDINGS"
<devicetree@...r.kernel.org>, alex.williamson@...hat.com,
Linux PM <linux-pm@...r.kernel.org>, sboyd@...nel.org,
freedreno <freedreno@...ts.freedesktop.org>,
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>,
open list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"list@....net:IOMMU DRIVERS <iommu@...ts.linux-foundation.org>, Joerg
Roedel <joro@...tes.org>," <iommu@...ts.linux-foundation.org>,
robh+dt <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
linux-arm-msm <linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org>,
Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@....com>
Subject: Re: [RESEND PATCH v17 2/5] iommu/arm-smmu: Invoke pm_runtime during
probe, add/remove device
On Thu, Nov 22, 2018 at 05:32:24PM +0530, Vivek Gautam wrote:
> Hi Will,
>
> On Wed, Nov 21, 2018 at 11:09 PM Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com> wrote:
> >
> > On Fri, Nov 16, 2018 at 04:54:27PM +0530, Vivek Gautam wrote:
> > > From: Sricharan R <sricharan@...eaurora.org>
> > >
> > > The smmu device probe/remove and add/remove master device callbacks
> > > gets called when the smmu is not linked to its master, that is without
> > > the context of the master device. So calling runtime apis in those places
> > > separately.
> > > Global locks are also initialized before enabling runtime pm as the
> > > runtime_resume() calls device_reset() which does tlb_sync_global()
> > > that ultimately requires locks to be initialized.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Sricharan R <sricharan@...eaurora.org>
> > > [vivek: Cleanup pm runtime calls]
> > > Signed-off-by: Vivek Gautam <vivek.gautam@...eaurora.org>
> > > Reviewed-by: Tomasz Figa <tfiga@...omium.org>
> > > Tested-by: Srinivas Kandagatla <srinivas.kandagatla@...aro.org>
> > > Reviewed-by: Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@....com>
> > > ---
> > > drivers/iommu/arm-smmu.c | 101 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-----
> > > 1 file changed, 91 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)
> >
> > Given that you're doing the get/put in the TLBI ops unconditionally:
> >
> > > static void arm_smmu_flush_iotlb_all(struct iommu_domain *domain)
> > > {
> > > struct arm_smmu_domain *smmu_domain = to_smmu_domain(domain);
> > > + struct arm_smmu_device *smmu = smmu_domain->smmu;
> > >
> > > - if (smmu_domain->tlb_ops)
> > > + if (smmu_domain->tlb_ops) {
> > > + arm_smmu_rpm_get(smmu);
> > > smmu_domain->tlb_ops->tlb_flush_all(smmu_domain);
> > > + arm_smmu_rpm_put(smmu);
> > > + }
> > > }
> > >
> > > static void arm_smmu_iotlb_sync(struct iommu_domain *domain)
> > > {
> > > struct arm_smmu_domain *smmu_domain = to_smmu_domain(domain);
> > > + struct arm_smmu_device *smmu = smmu_domain->smmu;
> > >
> > > - if (smmu_domain->tlb_ops)
> > > + if (smmu_domain->tlb_ops) {
> > > + arm_smmu_rpm_get(smmu);
> > > smmu_domain->tlb_ops->tlb_sync(smmu_domain);
> > > + arm_smmu_rpm_put(smmu);
> > > + }
> >
> > Why do you need them around the map/unmap calls as well?
>
> We still have .tlb_add_flush path?
Ok, so we could add the ops around that as well. Right now, we've got
the runtime pm hooks crossing two parts of the API.
Will
Powered by blists - more mailing lists