Re: [PATCH v2 2/3] iommu/arm-smmu: add ACTLR data and support for SM8550

From: Dmitry Baryshkov
Date: Wed Nov 15 2023 - 05:45:32 EST

Next message: David Hildenbrand: "Re: [RFC PATCH] mm: support large folio numa balancing"
Previous message: Lukas Bulwahn: "[PATCH] MAINTAINERS: add omap bus drivers to OMAP2+ SUPPORT"
In reply to: Bibek Kumar Patro: "Re: [PATCH v2 2/3] iommu/arm-smmu: add ACTLR data and support for SM8550"
Next in thread: Bibek Kumar Patro: "Re: [PATCH v2 2/3] iommu/arm-smmu: add ACTLR data and support for SM8550"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

On Wed, 15 Nov 2023 at 11:51, Bibek Kumar Patro
<quic_bibekkum@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>
>
> On 11/15/2023 3:08 PM, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote:
> > On Wed, 15 Nov 2023 at 11:22, Bibek Kumar Patro
> > <quic_bibekkum@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> On 11/14/2023 7:42 PM, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote:
> >>> On Tue, 14 Nov 2023 at 15:57, Bibek Kumar Patro
> >>> <quic_bibekkum@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> Add ACTLR data table for SM8550 along with support for
> >>>> same including SM8550 specific implementation operations.
> >>>>
> >>>> Signed-off-by: Bibek Kumar Patro <quic_bibekkum@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> >>>> ---
> >>>> drivers/iommu/arm/arm-smmu/arm-smmu-qcom.c | 92 +++++++++++++++++++++-
> >>>> 1 file changed, 88 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
> >>>>
> >>>> diff --git a/drivers/iommu/arm/arm-smmu/arm-smmu-qcom.c b/drivers/iommu/arm/arm-smmu/arm-smmu-qcom.c
> >>>> index 578c662c7c30..0eaf6f2a2e49 100644
> >>>> --- a/drivers/iommu/arm/arm-smmu/arm-smmu-qcom.c
> >>>> +++ b/drivers/iommu/arm/arm-smmu/arm-smmu-qcom.c
> >>>> @@ -25,6 +25,70 @@ struct actlr_data {
> >>>> u32 actlr;
> >>>> };
> >>>>
> >>>> +#define PRE_FETCH_1 0
> >>>> +#define PRE_FETCH_2 BIT(8)
> >>>> +#define PRE_FETCH_3 (BIT(9) | BIT(8))
> >>>
> >>> What is the difference between PRE_FETCH_3 and PRE_FETCH_2? And
> >>> PRE_FETCH_1? Are these real numbers that refer to some amount / count
> >>> or just dummy names?
> >>>
> >>
> >> No,these are not real numbers, but prefetch settings for a particular
> >> perfect configuration.
> >
> > Then I'd ask for some better names or descriptions.
> >
>
> Noted, PREFETCH_SETTING_n / PREFETCH_OPTION_n sounds like a better name
> in the following case. Would it be okay to use this name instead?

Not really.

>
> >>
> >>>> +#define CPRE BIT(1) /* Enable context caching in the prefetch buffer */
> >>>> +#define CMTLB BIT(0) /* Enable context caching in the macro TLB */
> >>>> +
> >>>> +static const struct actlr_data sm8550_apps_actlr_data[] = {
> >>>> + { 0x18a0, 0x0000, PRE_FETCH_2 | CPRE | CMTLB },
> >>>> + { 0x18e0, 0x0000, PRE_FETCH_2 | CPRE | CMTLB },
> >>>> + { 0x0800, 0x0020, PRE_FETCH_1 | CMTLB },
> >>>> + { 0x1800, 0x00c0, PRE_FETCH_1 | CMTLB },
> >>>> + { 0x1820, 0x0000, PRE_FETCH_1 | CMTLB },
> >>>> + { 0x1860, 0x0000, PRE_FETCH_1 | CMTLB },
> >>>> + { 0x0c01, 0x0020, PRE_FETCH_3 | CPRE | CMTLB },
> >>>> + { 0x0c02, 0x0020, PRE_FETCH_3 | CPRE | CMTLB },
> >>>> + { 0x0c03, 0x0020, PRE_FETCH_3 | CPRE | CMTLB },
> >>>> + { 0x0c04, 0x0020, PRE_FETCH_3 | CPRE | CMTLB },
> >>>> + { 0x0c05, 0x0020, PRE_FETCH_3 | CPRE | CMTLB },
> >>>> + { 0x0c06, 0x0020, PRE_FETCH_3 | CPRE | CMTLB },
> >>>> + { 0x0c07, 0x0020, PRE_FETCH_3 | CPRE | CMTLB },
> >>>> + { 0x0c08, 0x0020, PRE_FETCH_3 | CPRE | CMTLB },
> >>>> + { 0x0c09, 0x0020, PRE_FETCH_3 | CPRE | CMTLB },
> >>>> + { 0x0c0c, 0x0020, PRE_FETCH_3 | CPRE | CMTLB },
> >>>> + { 0x0c0d, 0x0020, PRE_FETCH_3 | CPRE | CMTLB },
> >>>> + { 0x0c0e, 0x0020, PRE_FETCH_3 | CPRE | CMTLB },
> >>>> + { 0x0c0f, 0x0020, PRE_FETCH_3 | CPRE | CMTLB },
> >>>> + { 0x1961, 0x0000, PRE_FETCH_3 | CPRE | CMTLB },
> >>>> + { 0x1962, 0x0000, PRE_FETCH_3 | CPRE | CMTLB },
> >>>> + { 0x1963, 0x0000, PRE_FETCH_3 | CPRE | CMTLB },
> >>>> + { 0x1964, 0x0000, PRE_FETCH_3 | CPRE | CMTLB },
> >>>> + { 0x1965, 0x0000, PRE_FETCH_3 | CPRE | CMTLB },
> >>>> + { 0x1966, 0x0000, PRE_FETCH_3 | CPRE | CMTLB },
> >>>> + { 0x1967, 0x0000, PRE_FETCH_3 | CPRE | CMTLB },
> >>>> + { 0x1968, 0x0000, PRE_FETCH_3 | CPRE | CMTLB },
> >>>> + { 0x1969, 0x0000, PRE_FETCH_3 | CPRE | CMTLB },
> >>>> + { 0x196c, 0x0000, PRE_FETCH_3 | CPRE | CMTLB },
> >>>> + { 0x196d, 0x0000, PRE_FETCH_3 | CPRE | CMTLB },
> >>>> + { 0x196e, 0x0000, PRE_FETCH_3 | CPRE | CMTLB },
> >>>> + { 0x196f, 0x0000, PRE_FETCH_3 | CPRE | CMTLB },
> >>>> + { 0x19c1, 0x0010, PRE_FETCH_3 | CPRE | CMTLB },
> >>>> + { 0x19c2, 0x0010, PRE_FETCH_3 | CPRE | CMTLB },
> >>>> + { 0x19c3, 0x0010, PRE_FETCH_3 | CPRE | CMTLB },
> >>>> + { 0x19c4, 0x0010, PRE_FETCH_3 | CPRE | CMTLB },
> >>>> + { 0x19c5, 0x0010, PRE_FETCH_3 | CPRE | CMTLB },
> >>>> + { 0x19c6, 0x0010, PRE_FETCH_3 | CPRE | CMTLB },
> >>>> + { 0x19c7, 0x0010, PRE_FETCH_3 | CPRE | CMTLB },
> >>>> + { 0x19c8, 0x0010, PRE_FETCH_3 | CPRE | CMTLB },
> >>>> + { 0x19c9, 0x0010, PRE_FETCH_3 | CPRE | CMTLB },
> >>>> + { 0x19cc, 0x0010, PRE_FETCH_3 | CPRE | CMTLB },
> >>>> + { 0x19cd, 0x0010, PRE_FETCH_3 | CPRE | CMTLB },
> >>>> + { 0x19ce, 0x0010, PRE_FETCH_3 | CPRE | CMTLB },
> >>>> + { 0x19cf, 0x0010, PRE_FETCH_3 | CPRE | CMTLB },
> >>>> + { 0x1c00, 0x0002, PRE_FETCH_2 | CPRE | CMTLB },
> >>>> + { 0x1c01, 0x0000, PRE_FETCH_1 | CMTLB },
> >>>> + { 0x1920, 0x0000, PRE_FETCH_2 | CPRE | CMTLB },
> >>>> + { 0x1923, 0x0000, PRE_FETCH_2 | CPRE | CMTLB },
> >>>> + { 0x1924, 0x0000, PRE_FETCH_2 | CPRE | CMTLB },
> >>>> + { 0x1940, 0x0000, PRE_FETCH_2 | CPRE | CMTLB },
> >>>> + { 0x1941, 0x0004, PRE_FETCH_2 | CPRE | CMTLB },
> >>>> + { 0x1943, 0x0000, PRE_FETCH_2 | CPRE | CMTLB },
> >>>> + { 0x1944, 0x0000, PRE_FETCH_2 | CPRE | CMTLB },
> >>>> + { 0x1947, 0x0000, PRE_FETCH_2 | CPRE | CMTLB },
> >>>> +};
> >>>> +
> >>>> static struct qcom_smmu *to_qcom_smmu(struct arm_smmu_device *smmu)
> >>>> {
> >>>> return container_of(smmu, struct qcom_smmu, smmu);
> >>>> @@ -459,6 +523,16 @@ static const struct arm_smmu_impl sdm845_smmu_500_impl = {
> >>>> .tlb_sync = qcom_smmu_tlb_sync,
> >>>> };
> >>>>
> >>>> +
> >>>> +static const struct arm_smmu_impl sm8550_smmu_500_impl = {
> >>>> + .init_context = qcom_smmu_init_context,
> >>>> + .cfg_probe = qcom_smmu_cfg_probe,
> >>>> + .def_domain_type = qcom_smmu_def_domain_type,
> >>>> + .reset = arm_mmu500_reset,
> >>>> + .write_s2cr = qcom_smmu_write_s2cr,
> >>>> + .tlb_sync = qcom_smmu_tlb_sync,
> >>>
> >>> What is the difference between this one and qcom_smmu_500_impl ?
> >>>
> >>
> >> Noted, will remove this and use qcom_smmu_500_impl instead.
> >> Thanks for pointing this out.
> >> Since inititally the reset ops was different to reset CPRE bit only for
> >> sm8550 SoC hence sm8550_smmu_500_impl is defined, but now default reset
> >> ops is modified to set CPRE bit for all SoCs ([PATCH v2 3/3]) so it
> >> should be fine to use qcom_smmu_500_impl as there's no difference now.
> >>
> >>>> +};
> >>>> +
> >>>> static const struct arm_smmu_impl qcom_adreno_smmu_v2_impl = {
> >>>> .init_context = qcom_adreno_smmu_init_context,
> >>>> .def_domain_type = qcom_smmu_def_domain_type,
> >>>> @@ -522,6 +596,11 @@ static const struct qcom_smmu_config qcom_smmu_impl0_cfg = {
> >>>> .reg_offset = qcom_smmu_impl0_reg_offset,
> >>>> };
> >>>>
> >>>> +static const struct actlr_config sm8550_actlrcfg = {
> >>>> + .adata = sm8550_apps_actlr_data,
> >>>> + .size = ARRAY_SIZE(sm8550_apps_actlr_data),
> >>>> +};
> >>>> +
> >>>> /*
> >>>> * It is not yet possible to use MDP SMMU with the bypass quirk on the msm8996,
> >>>> * there are not enough context banks.
> >>>> @@ -545,16 +624,20 @@ static const struct qcom_smmu_match_data sdm845_smmu_500_data = {
> >>>> /* Also no debug configuration. */
> >>>> };
> >>>>
> >>>> +
> >>>> +static const struct qcom_smmu_match_data sm8550_smmu_500_impl0_data = {
> >>>> + .impl = &sm8550_smmu_500_impl,
> >>>> + .adreno_impl = &qcom_adreno_smmu_500_impl,
> >>>> + .cfg = &qcom_smmu_impl0_cfg,
> >>>> + .actlrcfg = &sm8550_actlrcfg,
> >>>> +};
> >>>> +
> >>>> static const struct qcom_smmu_match_data qcom_smmu_500_impl0_data = {
> >>>> .impl = &qcom_smmu_500_impl,
> >>>> .adreno_impl = &qcom_adreno_smmu_500_impl,
> >>>> .cfg = &qcom_smmu_impl0_cfg,
> >>>> };
> >>>>
> >>>> -/*
> >>>> - * Do not add any more qcom,SOC-smmu-500 entries to this list, unless they need
> >>>> - * special handling and can not be covered by the qcom,smmu-500 entry.
> >>>> - */
> >>>
> >>> NAK, leave this in place.
> >>>
> >>
> >> Ack, will address this in next version.
> >>
> >>>> static const struct of_device_id __maybe_unused qcom_smmu_impl_of_match[] = {
> >>>> { .compatible = "qcom,msm8996-smmu-v2", .data = &msm8996_smmu_data },
> >>>> { .compatible = "qcom,msm8998-smmu-v2", .data = &qcom_smmu_v2_data },
> >>>> @@ -579,6 +662,7 @@ static const struct of_device_id __maybe_unused qcom_smmu_impl_of_match[] = {
> >>>> { .compatible = "qcom,sm8250-smmu-500", .data = &qcom_smmu_500_impl0_data },
> >>>> { .compatible = "qcom,sm8350-smmu-500", .data = &qcom_smmu_500_impl0_data },
> >>>> { .compatible = "qcom,sm8450-smmu-500", .data = &qcom_smmu_500_impl0_data },
> >>>> + { .compatible = "qcom,sm8550-smmu-500", .data = &sm8550_smmu_500_impl0_data },
> >>>> { .compatible = "qcom,smmu-500", .data = &qcom_smmu_500_impl0_data },
> >>>> { }
> >>>> };
> >>>> --
> >>>> 2.17.1
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >
> >
> >

--
With best wishes
Dmitry

Next message: David Hildenbrand: "Re: [RFC PATCH] mm: support large folio numa balancing"
Previous message: Lukas Bulwahn: "[PATCH] MAINTAINERS: add omap bus drivers to OMAP2+ SUPPORT"
In reply to: Bibek Kumar Patro: "Re: [PATCH v2 2/3] iommu/arm-smmu: add ACTLR data and support for SM8550"
Next in thread: Bibek Kumar Patro: "Re: [PATCH v2 2/3] iommu/arm-smmu: add ACTLR data and support for SM8550"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]