On Sat, Aug 04, 2018 at 05:29:56PM +0300, Dmitry Osipenko wrote: > In order to report clients name and access direction on GART's page fault, > MC driver need to access GART registers. Add facility that provides access > to the GART. > > Signed-off-by: Dmitry Osipenko <[email protected]> > --- > drivers/memory/tegra/mc.c | 26 +++++++++++++++++++++++--- > include/soc/tegra/mc.h | 13 +++++++++++++ > 2 files changed, 36 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/memory/tegra/mc.c b/drivers/memory/tegra/mc.c > index e56862495f36..4940d72b5263 100644 > --- a/drivers/memory/tegra/mc.c > +++ b/drivers/memory/tegra/mc.c > @@ -72,6 +72,8 @@ static const struct of_device_id tegra_mc_of_match[] = { > }; > MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(of, tegra_mc_of_match); > > +static struct tegra_mc_gart_handle *gart_handle; > +
Why the global variable? Can't this be part of struct tegra_mc? We
already do a very similar thing with the Tegra SMMU integration, why
invent something completely different? Can't we stick to a similar
mechanism?
Given that struct tegra_smmu is opaque at the memory controller level,
we could even go and store the GART related data in the same pointer.
How about the registration code goes into a struct tegra_gart_probe()
function that is called from tegra_mc_probe() right after the SMMU
block:
if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_TEGRA_IOMMU_SMMU)) {
mc->smmu = tegra_smmu_probe(...);
...
}
if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_TEGRA_IOMMU_GART)) {
mc->smmu = tegra_gart_probe(...);
...
}
?
Thierry
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ iommu mailing list [email protected] https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/iommu
