[PATCH V2 5/7] dt-bindings: Add xen,dev-domid property description for xen-grant DMA ops
Oleksandr
olekstysh at gmail.com
Wed May 18 09:06:08 PDT 2022
On 18.05.22 17:32, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
Hello Arnd
> On Sat, May 7, 2022 at 7:19 PM Oleksandr Tyshchenko <olekstysh at gmail.com> wrote:
>> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/virtio/mmio.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/virtio/mmio.yaml
>> index 10c22b5..29a0932 100644
>> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/virtio/mmio.yaml
>> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/virtio/mmio.yaml
>> @@ -13,6 +13,9 @@ description:
>> See https://www.oasis-open.org/committees/tc_home.php?wg_abbrev=virtio for
>> more details.
>>
>> +allOf:
>> + - $ref: /schemas/arm/xen,dev-domid.yaml#
>> +
>> properties:
>> compatible:
>> const: virtio,mmio
>> @@ -33,6 +36,10 @@ properties:
>> description: Required for devices making accesses thru an IOMMU.
>> maxItems: 1
>>
>> + xen,dev-domid:
>> + description: Required when Xen grant mappings need to be enabled for device.
>> + $ref: /schemas/types.yaml#/definitions/uint32
>> +
>> required:
>> - compatible
>> - reg
> Sorry for joining the discussion late. Have you considered using the
> generic iommu
> binding here instead of a custom property?
I have to admit - no, I haven't. I was thinking that Xen specific
feature should be communicated using Xen specific DT property.
> This would mean having a device
> node for the grant-table mechanism that can be referred to using the 'iommus'
> phandle property, with the domid as an additional argument.
I assume, you are speaking about something like the following?
xen_dummy_iommu {
compatible = "xen,dummy-iommu";
#iommu-cells = <1>;
};
virtio at 3000 {
compatible = "virtio,mmio";
reg = <0x3000 0x100>;
interrupts = <41>;
/* The device is located in Xen domain with ID 1 */
iommus = <&xen_dummy_iommu 1>;
};
>
> It does not quite fit the model that Linux currently uses for iommus,
> as that has an allocator for dma_addr_t space
yes (# 3/7 adds grant-table based allocator)
> , but it would think it's
> conceptually close enough that it makes sense for the binding.
Interesting idea. I am wondering, do we need an extra actions for this
to work in Linux guest (dummy IOMMU driver, etc)?
>
> Arnd
--
Regards,
Oleksandr Tyshchenko
More information about the linux-arm-kernel
mailing list