Hi Robin, >On 25/04/16 16:58, Sricharan R wrote: >> Now that the device's iommu ops are configured at probe time, >> the device has to be added to the iommu late. >> >> Signed-off-by: Sricharan R <sricha...@codeaurora.org> >> --- >> drivers/of/device.c | 4 ++++ >> 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+) >> >> diff --git a/drivers/of/device.c b/drivers/of/device.c >> index 57a5f2d..722115c 100644 >> --- a/drivers/of/device.c >> +++ b/drivers/of/device.c >> @@ -6,6 +6,7 @@ >> #include <linux/of_iommu.h> >> #include <linux/dma-mapping.h> >> #include <linux/init.h> >> +#include <linux/iommu.h> >> #include <linux/module.h> >> #include <linux/mod_devicetable.h> >> #include <linux/slab.h> >> @@ -154,6 +155,9 @@ int of_dma_configure_ops(struct device *dev, struct >> device_node *np) >> dev_dbg(dev, "device is%sbehind an iommu\n", >> iommu ? " " : " not "); >> >> + if (iommu) >> + iommu_bus_add_dev(dev); > >This (in conjunction with the previous patch) seems unnecessarily >convoluted - if of_iommu_configure() has found some iommu_ops for a >device, why not just call .add_device() directly there and then? There >are already systems that could warrant having two different IOMMU >drivers active simultaneously (but thankfully don't _need_ to), so >trying to escape from per-bus IOMMU ops makes more sense than >entrenching the horrible notion of "the" IOMMU on "the" platform bus any >further. > Ok, agree on this. This will remove the addition of that api in previous patch as well. Will change this.
Regards, Sricharan _______________________________________________ iommu mailing list iommu@lists.linux-foundation.org https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/iommu
