[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <e5b9f269-3ddd-d4e5-de26-413414c3ccf2@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 30 Sep 2020 08:48:49 +0300
From: Dmitry Osipenko <digetx@...il.com>
To: Nicolin Chen <nicoleotsuka@...il.com>
Cc: thierry.reding@...il.com, joro@...tes.org, krzk@...nel.org,
vdumpa@...dia.com, jonathanh@...dia.com,
linux-tegra@...r.kernel.org, iommu@...ts.linux-foundation.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/3] iommu/tegra-smmu: Rework .probe_device and
.attach_dev
30.09.2020 08:39, Nicolin Chen пишет:
> On Wed, Sep 30, 2020 at 08:24:02AM +0300, Dmitry Osipenko wrote:
>> 30.09.2020 03:30, Nicolin Chen пишет:
>>> + /*
>>> + * IOMMU core allows -ENODEV return to carry on. So bypass any call
>>> + * from bus_set_iommu() during tegra_smmu_probe(), as a device will
>>> + * call in again via of_iommu_configure when fwspec is prepared.
>>> + */
>>> + if (!mc->smmu || !fwspec || fwspec->ops != &tegra_smmu_ops)
>>> return ERR_PTR(-ENODEV);
>>
>> The !mc->smmu can't be true.
>
> Are you sure? I have removed the "mc->smmu = smmu" in probe() with
> this change. So the only time "mc->smmu == !NULL" is after probe()
> of SMMU driver is returned. As my comments says, tegra_smmu_probe()
> calls in this function via bus_set_iommu(), so mc->smmu can be NULL
> in this case.
>
I missed that.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists