Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 26 Feb 2021 13:36:33 +0530 | From | Sai Prakash Ranjan <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH 2/2] iommu/arm-smmu-qcom: Move the adreno smmu specific impl earlier |
| |
On 2021-02-25 23:36, Jordan Crouse wrote: > On Thu, Feb 25, 2021 at 03:54:10PM +0530, Sai Prakash Ranjan wrote: >> Adreno(GPU) SMMU and APSS(Application Processor SubSystem) SMMU >> both implement "arm,mmu-500" in some QTI SoCs and to run through >> adreno smmu specific implementation such as enabling split pagetables >> support, we need to match the "qcom,adreno-smmu" compatible first >> before apss smmu or else we will be running apps smmu implementation >> for adreno smmu and the additional features for adreno smmu is never >> set. For ex: we have "qcom,sc7280-smmu-500" compatible for both apps >> and adreno smmu implementing "arm,mmu-500", so the adreno smmu >> implementation is never reached because the current sequence checks >> for apps smmu compatible(qcom,sc7280-smmu-500) first and runs that >> specific impl and we never reach adreno smmu specific implementation. >> >> Suggested-by: Akhil P Oommen <akhilpo@codeaurora.org> >> Signed-off-by: Sai Prakash Ranjan <saiprakash.ranjan@codeaurora.org> >> --- >> >> Its either this or we add a new compatible for adreno smmu >> implementing >> arm,mmu-500 like "qcom,sc7280-adreno-smmu-500". >> >> --- >> drivers/iommu/arm/arm-smmu/arm-smmu-qcom.c | 6 +++--- >> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/drivers/iommu/arm/arm-smmu/arm-smmu-qcom.c >> b/drivers/iommu/arm/arm-smmu/arm-smmu-qcom.c >> index bea3ee0dabc2..7d0fc2c8e72f 100644 >> --- a/drivers/iommu/arm/arm-smmu/arm-smmu-qcom.c >> +++ b/drivers/iommu/arm/arm-smmu/arm-smmu-qcom.c >> @@ -345,11 +345,11 @@ struct arm_smmu_device >> *qcom_smmu_impl_init(struct arm_smmu_device *smmu) >> { >> const struct device_node *np = smmu->dev->of_node; >> >> - if (of_match_node(qcom_smmu_impl_of_match, np)) >> - return qcom_smmu_create(smmu, &qcom_smmu_impl); >> - >> if (of_device_is_compatible(np, "qcom,adreno-smmu")) >> return qcom_smmu_create(smmu, &qcom_adreno_smmu_impl); >> >> + if (of_match_node(qcom_smmu_impl_of_match, np)) >> + return qcom_smmu_create(smmu, &qcom_smmu_impl); >> + > > It would be good to add a comment here explaining the order here so we > don't accidentally reorganize ourselves back into a problem later. >
Sure its better, will add it.
Thanks, Sai
-- QUALCOMM INDIA, on behalf of Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum, hosted by The Linux Foundation
| |