On Tue, Jun 02, 2015 at 10:47:46AM +0100, Will Deacon wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 02, 2015 at 08:39:56AM +0100, Joerg Roedel wrote:
> > I don't think we need to postpone anything. Domains returned by
> > iommu_domain_alloc() need to work for all groups. If there are multiple
> > IOMMUs in the system with
On Tue, Jun 02, 2015 at 08:39:56AM +0100, Joerg Roedel wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 01, 2015 at 10:40:14AM +0100, Will Deacon wrote:
> > I like this proposal. The only remaining part is that the pgsize bitmap
> > inherited by the domain can only truly be finalised once the page table
> > is allocated, whic
Hi Will,
On Mon, Jun 01, 2015 at 10:40:14AM +0100, Will Deacon wrote:
> I like this proposal. The only remaining part is that the pgsize bitmap
> inherited by the domain can only truly be finalised once the page table
> is allocated, which in turn can only happen once we've identified the
> IOMMU
Hi Joerg,
On Fri, May 29, 2015 at 03:40:43PM +0100, Joerg Roedel wrote:
> On Fri, May 29, 2015 at 12:35:56PM +0100, Robin Murphy wrote:
> > The trouble with this is, what about the CPU page size? Say you have
> > some multimedia subsystem with its own integrated SMMU and for that
> > they've only
On Fri, May 29, 2015 at 12:35:56PM +0100, Robin Murphy wrote:
> The trouble with this is, what about the CPU page size? Say you have
> some multimedia subsystem with its own integrated SMMU and for that
> they've only implemented the 16K granule scheme because it works
> best for the video hardware
Hi Joerg,
On 29/05/15 07:43, Joerg Roedel wrote:
Hi Will,
On Wed, May 20, 2015 at 06:09:26PM +0100, Will Deacon wrote:
On Tue, May 19, 2015 at 04:24:35PM +0100, Joerg Roedel wrote:
+ /* Page sizes */
+ if (reg & IDR5_GRAN64K)
+ pgsize_bitmap |= SZ_64K | SZ_512M;
+
Hi Will,
On Wed, May 20, 2015 at 06:09:26PM +0100, Will Deacon wrote:
> On Tue, May 19, 2015 at 04:24:35PM +0100, Joerg Roedel wrote:
> > > + /* Page sizes */
> > > + if (reg & IDR5_GRAN64K)
> > > + pgsize_bitmap |= SZ_64K | SZ_512M;
> > > + if (reg & IDR5_GRAN16K)
> > > + pgsize_b
On 2015/5/27 0:12, Will Deacon wrote:
> On Mon, May 25, 2015 at 03:07:17AM +0100, leizhen wrote:
>> On 2015/5/21 19:25, Will Deacon wrote:
>>> On Wed, May 13, 2015 at 09:33:19AM +0100, leizhen wrote:
If SMMU_IDR1.SIDSIZE = 32 really exist(or too big), we need dynamic choose
Lv2 table size
On Mon, May 25, 2015 at 03:07:17AM +0100, leizhen wrote:
> On 2015/5/21 19:25, Will Deacon wrote:
> > On Wed, May 13, 2015 at 09:33:19AM +0100, leizhen wrote:
> >> If SMMU_IDR1.SIDSIZE = 32 really exist(or too big), we need dynamic choose
> >> Lv2 table size(4K,16K,64K). Because Lv1 table maybe to
On 2015/5/21 19:25, Will Deacon wrote:
> Hi again,
>
> Sorry for the delay in replying, I've been tied up with other stuff.
>
> On Wed, May 13, 2015 at 09:33:19AM +0100, leizhen wrote:
>> On 2015/5/13 0:55, Will Deacon wrote:
>>> The purpose of the two level approach isn't to save memory; it's to
Hi again,
Sorry for the delay in replying, I've been tied up with other stuff.
On Wed, May 13, 2015 at 09:33:19AM +0100, leizhen wrote:
> On 2015/5/13 0:55, Will Deacon wrote:
> > The purpose of the two level approach isn't to save memory; it's to remove
> > the need for a single (large) contiguo
On Tue, May 19, 2015 at 04:24:35PM +0100, Joerg Roedel wrote:
> Hi Will,
Hi Joerg,
> the code looks good overall, I just have some questions below.
Great, thanks for having a look. I'll still need to post a v2 to address
some of the other comments I've had.
> On Fri, May 08, 2015 at 07:00:45PM
Hi Will,
the code looks good overall, I just have some questions below.
On Fri, May 08, 2015 at 07:00:45PM +0100, Will Deacon wrote:
> +static int arm_smmu_attach_dev(struct iommu_domain *domain, struct device
> *dev)
> +{
> + int ret = 0;
> + struct arm_smmu_device *smmu;
> + struct
On 2015/5/13 0:55, Will Deacon wrote:
> Hi Leizhen,
>
> Thanks for the review!
>
> On Tue, May 12, 2015 at 08:40:06AM +0100, leizhen wrote:
>>
>>> +
>>> +static int queue_poll_cons(struct arm_smmu_queue *q, u32 until, bool wfe)
>>> +{
>>> + ktime_t timeout = ktime_add_us(ktime_get(), ARM_SMMU
Hi Leizhen,
Thanks for the review!
On Tue, May 12, 2015 at 08:40:06AM +0100, leizhen wrote:
>
> > +
> > +static int queue_poll_cons(struct arm_smmu_queue *q, u32 until, bool wfe)
> > +{
> > + ktime_t timeout = ktime_add_us(ktime_get(), ARM_SMMU_POLL_TIMEOUT_US);
> > +
> > + while (queue_
> +
> +static int queue_poll_cons(struct arm_smmu_queue *q, u32 until, bool wfe)
> +{
> + ktime_t timeout = ktime_add_us(ktime_get(), ARM_SMMU_POLL_TIMEOUT_US);
> +
> + while (queue_sync_cons(q), __queue_cons_before(q, until)) {
> + if (ktime_compare(ktime_get(), timeout) > 0)
Version three of the ARM SMMU architecture introduces significant
changes and improvements over previous versions of the specification,
necessitating a new driver in the Linux kernel.
The main change to the programming interface is that the majority of the
configuration data has been moved from MM
17 matches
Mail list logo
