lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2018]   [Aug]   [28]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: [PATCH 4/5] iommu/arm-smmu: Make way to add Qcom's smmu-500 errata handling
From
Date
Hi Robin,


On 8/14/2018 10:29 PM, Robin Murphy wrote:
> On 14/08/18 11:55, Vivek Gautam wrote:
>> Cleanup to re-use some of the stuff
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Vivek Gautam <vivek.gautam@codeaurora.org>
>> ---
>>   drivers/iommu/arm-smmu.c | 32 +++++++++++++++++++++++++-------
>>   1 file changed, 25 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
>
> I think the overall diffstat would be an awful lot smaller if the
> erratum workaround just has its own readl_poll_timeout() as it does in
> the vendor kernel. The burst-polling loop is for minimising latency in
> high-throughput situations, and if you're in a workaround which has to
> lock *every* register write and issue two firmware calls around each
> sync I think you're already well out of that game.

Sorry for the delayed response. I was on vacation.
I will fix this in my next version by adding the separate
read_poll_timeout() for the erratum WA.

>
>> diff --git a/drivers/iommu/arm-smmu.c b/drivers/iommu/arm-smmu.c
>> index 32e86df80428..75c146751c87 100644
>> --- a/drivers/iommu/arm-smmu.c
>> +++ b/drivers/iommu/arm-smmu.c
>> @@ -391,21 +391,31 @@ static void __arm_smmu_free_bitmap(unsigned
>> long *map, int idx)
>>       clear_bit(idx, map);
>>   }
>>   -/* Wait for any pending TLB invalidations to complete */
>> -static void __arm_smmu_tlb_sync(struct arm_smmu_device *smmu,
>> -                void __iomem *sync, void __iomem *status)
>> +static int __arm_smmu_tlb_sync_wait(void __iomem *status)
>>   {
>>       unsigned int spin_cnt, delay;
>>   -    writel_relaxed(0, sync);
>>       for (delay = 1; delay < TLB_LOOP_TIMEOUT; delay *= 2) {
>>           for (spin_cnt = TLB_SPIN_COUNT; spin_cnt > 0; spin_cnt--) {
>>               if (!(readl_relaxed(status) & sTLBGSTATUS_GSACTIVE))
>> -                return;
>> +                return 0;
>>               cpu_relax();
>>           }
>>           udelay(delay);
>>       }
>> +
>> +    return -EBUSY;
>> +}
>> +
>> +/* Wait for any pending TLB invalidations to complete */
>> +static void __arm_smmu_tlb_sync(struct arm_smmu_device *smmu,
>> +                void __iomem *sync, void __iomem *status)
>> +{
>> +    writel_relaxed(0, sync);
>> +
>> +    if (!__arm_smmu_tlb_sync_wait(status))
>> +        return;
>> +
>>       dev_err_ratelimited(smmu->dev,
>>                   "TLB sync timed out -- SMMU may be deadlocked\n");
>>   }
>> @@ -461,8 +471,9 @@ static void arm_smmu_tlb_inv_context_s2(void
>> *cookie)
>>       arm_smmu_tlb_sync_global(smmu);
>>   }
>>   -static void arm_smmu_tlb_inv_range_nosync(unsigned long iova,
>> size_t size,
>> -                      size_t granule, bool leaf, void *cookie)
>> +static void __arm_smmu_tlb_inv_range_nosync(unsigned long iova,
>> size_t size,
>> +                        size_t granule, bool leaf,
>> +                        void *cookie)
>>   {
>>       struct arm_smmu_domain *smmu_domain = cookie;
>>       struct arm_smmu_cfg *cfg = &smmu_domain->cfg;
>> @@ -498,6 +509,13 @@ static void
>> arm_smmu_tlb_inv_range_nosync(unsigned long iova, size_t size,
>>       }
>>   }
>>   +static void arm_smmu_tlb_inv_range_nosync(unsigned long iova,
>> size_t size,
>> +                      size_t granule, bool leaf,
>> +                      void *cookie)
>> +{
>> +    __arm_smmu_tlb_inv_range_nosync(iova, size, granule, leaf, cookie);
>> +}
>> +
>
> AFAICS even after patch #5 this does absolutely nothing except make
> the code needlessly harder to read :(

Sure, I will rather call arm_smmu_tlb_inv_range_nosync() from
qcom_errata_tlb_inv_range_nosync() then make this change.
Thanks for the review.

Best regards
Vivek

>
> Robin.
>
>>   /*
>>    * On MMU-401 at least, the cost of firing off multiple TLBIVMIDs
>> appears
>>    * almost negligible, but the benefit of getting the first one in
>> as far ahead
>>

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2018-08-28 09:00    [W:0.064 / U:0.688 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site