linux-kernel - [PATCH 4/8] iommu/arm-smmu: Support test_smr

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: <20200926130004.13528-5-kholk11@gmail.com>
Date:   Sat, 26 Sep 2020 15:00:00 +0200
From:   kholk11@...il.com
To:     will@...nel.org
Cc:     robin.murphy@....com, joro@...tes.org, bjorn.andersson@...aro.org,
        linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
        kholk11@...il.com, marijns95@...il.com, konradybcio@...il.com,
        martin.botka1@...il.com, linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org,
        phone-devel@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: [PATCH 4/8] iommu/arm-smmu: Support test_smr_masks implementation detail deviation

From: AngeloGioacchino Del Regno <kholk11@...il.com>

At least some Qualcomm SoCs do need to override the function
arm_smmu_test_smr_masks entirely: add a test_smr_masks function
to the implementation details structure and call it properly.

Signed-off-by: AngeloGioacchino Del Regno <kholk11@...il.com>
---
 drivers/iommu/arm/arm-smmu/arm-smmu.c | 6 ++++++
 drivers/iommu/arm/arm-smmu/arm-smmu.h | 1 +
 2 files changed, 7 insertions(+)

diff --git a/drivers/iommu/arm/arm-smmu/arm-smmu.c b/drivers/iommu/arm/arm-smmu/arm-smmu.c
index 09c42af9f31e..446a78dde9cd 100644
--- a/drivers/iommu/arm/arm-smmu/arm-smmu.c
+++ b/drivers/iommu/arm/arm-smmu/arm-smmu.c
@@ -977,6 +977,12 @@ static void arm_smmu_test_smr_masks(struct arm_smmu_device *smmu)
 
 	if (!smmu->smrs)
 		return;
+
+	if (smmu->impl && smmu->impl->test_smr_masks) {
+		smmu->impl->test_smr_masks(smmu);
+		return;
+	}
+
 	/*
 	 * If we've had to accommodate firmware memory regions, we may
 	 * have live SMRs by now; tread carefully...
diff --git a/drivers/iommu/arm/arm-smmu/arm-smmu.h b/drivers/iommu/arm/arm-smmu/arm-smmu.h
index d890a4a968e8..2cd3d126f675 100644
--- a/drivers/iommu/arm/arm-smmu/arm-smmu.h
+++ b/drivers/iommu/arm/arm-smmu/arm-smmu.h
@@ -387,6 +387,7 @@ struct arm_smmu_impl {
 	int (*cfg_probe)(struct arm_smmu_device *smmu);
 	int (*reset)(struct arm_smmu_device *smmu);
 	int (*init_context)(struct arm_smmu_domain *smmu_domain);
+	void (*test_smr_masks)(struct arm_smmu_device *smmu);
 	void (*tlb_sync)(struct arm_smmu_device *smmu, int page, int sync,
 			 int status);
 	int (*def_domain_type)(struct device *dev);
-- 
2.28.0