[PATCH v13 06/10] iommu/arm-smmu-v3: Add acpi_smmu_acpi_probe_model for impl
Robin Murphy
robin.murphy at arm.com
Tue Aug 27 08:57:48 PDT 2024
On 27/08/2024 2:02 pm, Will Deacon wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 23, 2024 at 05:10:40PM -0700, Nicolin Chen wrote:
>> For model-specific implementation, repurpose the acpi_smmu_get_options()
>> to a wider acpi_smmu_acpi_probe_model(). A new model can add to the list
>> in this new function.
>>
>> Suggested-by: Will Deacon <will at kernel.org>
>> Signed-off-by: Nicolin Chen <nicolinc at nvidia.com>
>> ---
>> drivers/iommu/arm/arm-smmu-v3/arm-smmu-v3.c | 18 +++++++++++++-----
>> 1 file changed, 13 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/iommu/arm/arm-smmu-v3/arm-smmu-v3.c b/drivers/iommu/arm/arm-smmu-v3/arm-smmu-v3.c
>> index afdb8a76a72a..ceb31d63f79b 100644
>> --- a/drivers/iommu/arm/arm-smmu-v3/arm-smmu-v3.c
>> +++ b/drivers/iommu/arm/arm-smmu-v3/arm-smmu-v3.c
>> @@ -4341,18 +4341,28 @@ static int arm_smmu_device_hw_probe(struct arm_smmu_device *smmu)
>> }
>>
>> #ifdef CONFIG_ACPI
>> -static void acpi_smmu_get_options(u32 model, struct arm_smmu_device *smmu)
>> +static int acpi_smmu_iort_probe_model(struct acpi_iort_node *node,
>> + struct arm_smmu_device *smmu)
>> {
>> - switch (model) {
>> + struct acpi_iort_smmu_v3 *iort_smmu =
>> + (struct acpi_iort_smmu_v3 *)node->node_data;
>> +
>> + switch (iort_smmu->model) {
>> case ACPI_IORT_SMMU_V3_CAVIUM_CN99XX:
>> smmu->options |= ARM_SMMU_OPT_PAGE0_REGS_ONLY;
>> break;
>> case ACPI_IORT_SMMU_V3_HISILICON_HI161X:
>> smmu->options |= ARM_SMMU_OPT_SKIP_PREFETCH;
>> break;
>> + case ACPI_IORT_SMMU_V3_GENERIC:
>> + break;
>> + default:
>> + dev_err(smmu->dev, "Unknown/unsupported IORT model!\n");
>> + return -ENXIO;
>
> We probably don't want this 'default' case, otherwise the driver will
> need to be updated every time there's a new model.
...although the intent is very strongly that there should never be any
new models, because by now hardware should really not be failing to
implement SMMU_IIDR correctly. In some ways, having this might help
further discourage people from abusing the mechanism and making random
stuff up in their firmware :/
Cheers,
Robin.
More information about the linux-arm-kernel
mailing list