lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2014]   [Jun]   [25]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH v2] devicetree: Add generic IOMMU device tree bindings
On Wed, Jun 25, 2014 at 11:12:13AM +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> On Wednesday 25 June 2014 10:57:36 Will Deacon wrote:
> > So far, I've been avoiding the hardcoding. However, you could potentially
> > build a system with a small number of SMRs (compared to the number of
> > StreamIDs) and allocate the StreamIDs in such a way that I think the dynamic
> > configuration would be NP complete if we require an optimal SMR allocation.
> >
> > However:
> >
> > (1) I don't know of a system where this is the case
> > (2) Not much work has been done on improving the dynamic allocator yet
> >
> > which is why I'm still favouring dynamic configuration in the driver.
> >
> > The other thing I forgot to mention earlier is that we need to support
> > device hotplug in the future, so some level of dynamic configuration
> > will always be required.
>
> Ok, got it. So we just hope that we can make dynamic configuration
> work all the time, but if it all fails, then we come up with a
> hardcoded configuration method.
>
> I guess this could be done similarly to how we handle clocks on
> a lot of systems: generally these are dynamic, but you have the
> option to provide hints in the clock controller node about how
> you expect things to be configured.
>
> For the SMMU that could mean that (if we get into the situation you
> describe), we add optional properties to the SMMU node itself
> describing how we expect the SMRs to be used.

That sounds good to me! Thanks for the discussion.

Will


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2014-06-25 12:41    [W:0.051 / U:1.520 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site