On Thu, Oct 31, 2013 at 07:25:25PM +0000, Stephen Warren wrote: > On 10/31/2013 01:16 PM, Stephen Warren wrote: > > Hmm. That's interesting. I see that the ARM SMMU has a list of the > > clients it affects, whereas this Tegra series puts information into each > > client device about the SMMU(s) that affect it. Is it better to flip the > > Tegra binding around to match the style of the ARM SMMU? > > One question here: How do you ensure that the SMMU driver probe()s > before probe() runs for devices affected by the SMMU?
I think we get away with this by virtue of nobody actually creating IOMMU mappings from within drivers, so the ordering is already handled. However, I also have a patch queued to move the SMMU initialisation to a subsys_initcall. I'm not particularly fond of that, but it seems to be the done thing (even for other architectures). Will _______________________________________________ iommu mailing list iommu@lists.linux-foundation.org https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/iommu
