[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAL_JsqLsb801Z4H7+ViboBSGwd+XidcpYcJMHgw+6fofsXB=9Q@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 19 Jul 2023 15:37:27 -0600
From: Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>
To: Conor Dooley <conor@...nel.org>,
Tomasz Jeznach <tjeznach@...osinc.com>
Cc: Joerg Roedel <joro@...tes.org>, Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>,
Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@....com>,
Paul Walmsley <paul.walmsley@...ive.com>,
Anup Patel <apatel@...tanamicro.com>,
Albert Ou <aou@...s.berkeley.edu>, linux@...osinc.com,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Sebastien Boeuf <seb@...osinc.com>,
iommu@...ts.linux.dev, Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@...belt.com>,
Nick Kossifidis <mick@....forth.gr>,
linux-riscv@...ts.infradead.org, krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org,
devicetree@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 03/11] dt-bindings: Add RISC-V IOMMU bindings
On Wed, Jul 19, 2023 at 2:19 PM Conor Dooley <conor@...nel.org> wrote:
>
> Hey Tomasz,
>
> On Wed, Jul 19, 2023 at 12:33:47PM -0700, Tomasz Jeznach wrote:
> > From: Anup Patel <apatel@...tanamicro.com>
> >
> > We add DT bindings document for RISC-V IOMMU platform and PCI devices
> > defined by the RISC-V IOMMU specification.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Anup Patel <apatel@...tanamicro.com>
>
> Your signoff is missing from here.
>
> Secondly, as get_maintainer.pl would have told you, dt-bindings patches
> need to be sent to the dt-binding maintainers and list.
> +CC maintainers & list.
>
> Thirdly, dt-binding patches should come before their users.
>
> > ---
> > .../bindings/iommu/riscv,iommu.yaml | 146 ++++++++++++++++++
> > 1 file changed, 146 insertions(+)
> > create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/iommu/riscv,iommu.yaml
> >
> > diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/iommu/riscv,iommu.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/iommu/riscv,iommu.yaml
> > new file mode 100644
> > index 000000000000..8a9aedb61768
> > --- /dev/null
> > +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/iommu/riscv,iommu.yaml
> > @@ -0,0 +1,146 @@
> > +# SPDX-License-Identifier: (GPL-2.0-only OR BSD-2-Clause)
> > +%YAML 1.2
> > +---
> > +$id: http://devicetree.org/schemas/iommu/riscv,iommu.yaml#
> > +$schema: http://devicetree.org/meta-schemas/core.yaml#
> > +
> > +title: RISC-V IOMMU Implementation
> > +
> > +maintainers:
> > + - Tomasz Jeznach <tjeznach@...osinc.com>
>
> What about Anup, who seems to have written this?
> Or your co-authors of the drivers?
>
> > +
> > +description:
> > + The RISC-V IOMMU specificaiton defines an IOMMU for RISC-V platforms
typo
> > + which can be a regular platform device or a PCI device connected to
> > + the host root port.
> > +
> > + The RISC-V IOMMU provides two stage translation, device directory table,
> > + command queue and fault reporting as wired interrupt or MSIx event for
> > + both PCI and platform devices.
TBC, you want a PCI device that's an IOMMU and the IOMMU serves
(provides translation for) PCI devices?
> > +
> > + Visit https://github.com/riscv-non-isa/riscv-iommu for more details.
> > +
> > +properties:
> > + compatible:
> > + oneOf:
> > + - description: RISC-V IOMMU as a platform device
"platform device" is a Linux term. Don't use Linux terms in bindings.
> > + items:
> > + - enum:
> > + - vendor,chip-iommu
>
> These dummy compatibles are not valid, as was pointed out to Anup on
> the AIA series. Please go look at what was done there instead:
> https://lore.kernel.org/all/20230719113542.2293295-7-apatel@ventanamicro.com/
>
> > + - const: riscv,iommu
> > +
> > + - description: RISC-V IOMMU as a PCI device connected to root port
> > + items:
> > + - enum:
> > + - vendor,chip-pci-iommu
> > + - const: riscv,pci-iommu
>
> I'm not really au fait with the arm smmu stuff, but do any of its
> versions support being connected to a root port?
PCI devices have a defined format for the compatible string based on
VID/PID. For PCI, also usually don't need to be described in DT
because they are discoverable. The exception is when there's parts
which aren't. Which parts aren't?
> > + reg:
> > + maxItems: 1
> > + description:
> > + For RISC-V IOMMU as a platform device, this represents the MMIO base
> > + address of registers.
> > +
> > + For RISC-V IOMMU as a PCI device, this represents the PCI-PCI bridge
Your IOMMU is also a PCI-PCI bridge? Is that a normal PCI thing?
> > + details as described in Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pci/pci.txt
Don't refer to pci.txt. It is going to be removed.
> > +
> > + '#iommu-cells':
> > + const: 2
> > + description: |
>
> |s are only needed where formatting needs to be preserved.
>
> > + Each IOMMU specifier represents the base device ID and number of
> > + device IDs.
Doesn't that assume device IDs are contiguous? Generally not a safe assumption.
> > +
> > + interrupts:
> > + minItems: 1
> > + maxItems: 16
>
> What are any of these interrupts?
>
> > + description:
> > + The presence of this property implies that given RISC-V IOMMU uses
> > + wired interrupts to notify the RISC-V HARTS (or CPUs).
> > +
> > + msi-parent:
> > + description:
> > + The presence of this property implies that given RISC-V IOMMU uses
> > + MSIx to notify the RISC-V HARTs (or CPUs). This property should be
> > + considered only when the interrupts property is absent.
This doesn't make sense for a PCI device. PCI defines its own way to
describe MSI support.
> > +
> > + dma-coherent:
>
> RISC-V is dma-coherent by default, should this not be dma-noncoherent
> instead?
>
> > + description:
> > + Present if page table walks and DMA accessed made by the RISC-V IOMMU
> > + are cache coherent with the CPU.
> > +
> > + power-domains:
> > + maxItems: 1
> > +
> > +required:
> > + - compatible
> > + - reg
> > + - '#iommu-cells'
> > +
> > +additionalProperties: false
> > +
> > +examples:
> > + - |
> > + /* Example 1 (IOMMU platform device with wired interrupts) */
> > + immu1: iommu@...cd000 {
>
> Why is this "immu"? typo or intentional?
>
> > + compatible = "vendor,chip-iommu", "riscv,iommu";
> > + reg = <0x1bccd000 0x1000>;
> > + interrupt-parent = <&aplic_smode>;
> > + interrupts = <32 4>, <33 4>, <34 4>, <35 4>;
> > + #iommu-cells = <2>;
> > + };
> > +
> > + /* Device with two IOMMU device IDs, 0 and 7 */
> > + master1 {
> > + iommus = <&immu1 0 1>, <&immu1 7 1>;
> > + };
> > +
> > + - |
> > + /* Example 2 (IOMMU platform device with MSIs) */
> > + immu2: iommu@...dd000 {
> > + compatible = "vendor,chip-iommu", "riscv,iommu";
> > + reg = <0x1bccd000 0x1000>;
> > + msi-parent = <&imsics_smode>;
> > + #iommu-cells = <2>;
> > + };
> > +
> > + bus {
> > + #address-cells = <2>;
> > + #size-cells = <2>;
> > +
> > + /* Device with IOMMU device IDs ranging from 32 to 64 */
> > + master1 {
> > + iommus = <&immu2 32 32>;
> > + };
> > +
> > + pcie@...00000 {
> > + compatible = "pci-host-cam-generic";
> > + device_type = "pci";
> > + #address-cells = <3>;
> > + #size-cells = <2>;
> > + bus-range = <0x0 0x1>;
> > +
> > + /* CPU_PHYSICAL(2) SIZE(2) */
I'm guessing there was more after this, but I don't have it...
Guessing, immu2 is a PCI device, but it translates for master1 which
is not a PCI device? Weird. Why would anyone build such a thing?
Rob
Powered by blists - more mailing lists