[PATCH v2 10/14] iommu/arm-smmu-v3: Replace arm_vsmmu_alloc with arm_vsmmu_init

[Pranjal Shrivastava]

On Mon, Jun 16, 2025 at 07:15:19PM -0700, Nicolin Chen wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 16, 2025 at 10:43:22PM +0000, Pranjal Shrivastava wrote:
> > On Fri, Jun 13, 2025 at 11:35:22PM -0700, Nicolin Chen wrote:
> > > To ease the for-driver iommufd APIs, get_viommu_size and viommu_init ops
> > > are introduced.
> > > 
> > > Sanitize the inputs and report the size of struct arm_vsmmu on success, in
> > > arm_smmu_get_viommu_size().
> > > 
> > > Place the type sanity at the last, becase there will be soon an impl level
> > > get_viommu_size op, which will require the same sanity tests prior. It can
> > > simply insert a piece of code in front of the IOMMU_VIOMMU_TYPE_ARM_SMMUV3
> > > sanity.
> > > 
> > 
> > That's what I was wondering, so we plan to replace the impl->vsmmu_alloc
> > op as well?
> 
> There is no such op in v6.16-rc1.
> 
> > > -	return &vsmmu->core;
> > > +	viommu->ops = &arm_vsmmu_ops;
> > > +	return 0;
> > >  }
> > 
> > Seems much better now that the driver doesn't need to callback to the
> > core for allocating viommu. One quick question though I see we've 
> > removed the following too:
> > 
> >         if (master->smmu->impl_ops &&master->smmu->impl_ops->vsmmu_alloc)
> > 	                vsmmu = master->smmu->impl_ops->vsmmu_alloc(
> > 			                        master->smmu, s2_parent,
> > 						ictx, viommu_type,
> > 						user_data);
> > 
> > Not sure why don't I see that in the diffs.. do we plan to split this
> > into an impl-specific size and init too?
> 
> Because there is no vsmmu_alloc in v6.16-rc1. I guess you are
> referring to older versions of HW queue (vCMDQ) series that
> was not merged?

That's right, my bad. I rebased the older series while pulling,
apologies for the confusion!

Reviewed-by: Pranjal Shrivastava <praan at google.com>

> 
> Thanks
> Nicolin

Thanks!