lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2016]   [Jun]   [21]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [RFC PATCH v2 00/15] ACPI IORT ARM SMMU v3 support
Hi Hanjun,

On Tue, Jun 21, 2016 at 06:37:17PM +0800, Hanjun Guo wrote:
> Hi Lorenzo,
>
> On 2016/6/7 21:30, Lorenzo Pieralisi wrote:
> >This RFC patch series is v2 of a previous posting:
> >
> >https://lkml.org/lkml/2016/4/14/702
> >
> >v1 -> v2:
> > - Rebased on top of dependencies series [1][2][3](v4.7-rc1)
> > - Removed IOMMU fwnode generalization
> > - Implemented ARM SMMU v3 ACPI probing instead of ARM SMMU v2
> > owing to patch series dependencies [1]
> > - Moved platform device creation logic to IORT code to
> > generalize its usage for ARM SMMU v1-v2-v3 components
> > - Removed reliance on ACPI early device probing
> > - Created IORT specific iommu_xlate() translation hook leaving
> > OF code unchanged according to v1 reviews
> >
> >The ACPI IORT table provides information that allows instantiating
> >ARM SMMU devices and carrying out id mappings between components on
> >ARM based systems (devices, IOMMUs, interrupt controllers).
> >
> >http://infocenter.arm.com/help/topic/com.arm.doc.den0049b/DEN0049B_IO_Remapping_Table.pdf
> >
> >Building on basic IORT support, available through [2]:
> >
> >this patchset enables ARM SMMU v3 support on ACPI systems.
>
> I'm trying to test your patches on D03 (SMMUv3 based) but ...

What do you mean by "I am trying.." :), have you actually tested
this series ?

> [...]
> >[1] R.Murphy "Generic DT bindings for PCI and ARM SMMU v3"
> > http://marc.info/?l=linux-arm-kernel&m=146497432413816&w=2
>
> ...This patch set is still in discussion and seems not work
> for non-PCI devices.

Can you be more specific please ? Yes, both series are work
in progress.

> >[2] T.Nowicki "Introduce ACPI world to ITS irqchip" v5
> > http://marc.info/?l=linux-acpi&m=146469369703684&w=2
>
> Tomasz sent out the v7 and included patches in your series.
>
> I think a updated version before the test makes sense, what
> do you think? Let me know your thoughts.

I am working with Robin so that the xlate() mechanism works
properly and seamlessly for both DT and ACPI, given the
dependencies I think it makes more sense to wait for Tomasz
and Robin patches to get merged or at least stabilize before
doing anything else, I am curently working on a v3.

Thanks,
Lorenzo

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2016-06-21 17:21    [W:1.685 / U:0.260 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site