linux-kernel - Re: [PATCHv5 5/6] iommu: arm-smmu-impl: Use table to list QCOM implementations

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]

Date:   Wed, 23 Sep 2020 16:24:53 +0100
From:   Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@....com>
To:     Sai Prakash Ranjan <saiprakash.ranjan@...eaurora.org>,
        Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>, Joerg Roedel <joro@...tes.org>,
        Jordan Crouse <jcrouse@...eaurora.org>,
        Rob Clark <robdclark@...il.com>
Cc:     iommu@...ts.linux-foundation.org,
        linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org,
        Akhil P Oommen <akhilpo@...eaurora.org>,
        Bjorn Andersson <bjorn.andersson@...aro.org>,
        freedreno@...ts.freedesktop.org,
        "Kristian H . Kristensen" <hoegsberg@...gle.com>,
        dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org
Subject: Re: [PATCHv5 5/6] iommu: arm-smmu-impl: Use table to list QCOM
 implementations

On 2020-09-22 07:18, Sai Prakash Ranjan wrote:
> Use table and of_match_node() to match qcom implementation
> instead of multiple of_device_compatible() calls for each
> QCOM SMMU implementation.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Sai Prakash Ranjan <saiprakash.ranjan@...eaurora.org>
> ---
>   drivers/iommu/arm/arm-smmu/arm-smmu-impl.c | 12 ++++++++----
>   1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/iommu/arm/arm-smmu/arm-smmu-impl.c b/drivers/iommu/arm/arm-smmu/arm-smmu-impl.c
> index d199b4bff15d..ce78295cfa78 100644
> --- a/drivers/iommu/arm/arm-smmu/arm-smmu-impl.c
> +++ b/drivers/iommu/arm/arm-smmu/arm-smmu-impl.c
> @@ -9,6 +9,13 @@
>   
>   #include "arm-smmu.h"
>   
> +static const struct of_device_id __maybe_unused qcom_smmu_impl_of_match[] = {
> +	{ .compatible = "qcom,sc7180-smmu-500" },
> +	{ .compatible = "qcom,sdm845-smmu-500" },
> +	{ .compatible = "qcom,sm8150-smmu-500" },
> +	{ .compatible = "qcom,sm8250-smmu-500" },
> +	{ }
> +};

Can you push the table itself into arm-smmu-qcom? That way you'll be 
free to add new SoCs willy-nilly without any possibility of conflicting 
with anything else.

Bonus points if you can fold in the Adreno variant and keep everything 
together ;)

Robin.

>   static int arm_smmu_gr0_ns(int offset)
>   {
> @@ -217,10 +224,7 @@ struct arm_smmu_device *arm_smmu_impl_init(struct arm_smmu_device *smmu)
>   	if (of_device_is_compatible(np, "nvidia,tegra194-smmu"))
>   		return nvidia_smmu_impl_init(smmu);
>   
> -	if (of_device_is_compatible(np, "qcom,sdm845-smmu-500") ||
> -	    of_device_is_compatible(np, "qcom,sc7180-smmu-500") ||
> -	    of_device_is_compatible(np, "qcom,sm8150-smmu-500") ||
> -	    of_device_is_compatible(np, "qcom,sm8250-smmu-500"))
> +	if (of_match_node(qcom_smmu_impl_of_match, np))
>   		return qcom_smmu_impl_init(smmu);
>   
>   	if (of_device_is_compatible(smmu->dev->of_node, "qcom,adreno-smmu"))
>