On Wed, 21 Jul 2021 14:59:47 +0100,
Robin Murphy <robin.mur...@arm.com> wrote:
>
> On 2021-07-21 14:12, Marc Zyngier wrote:
> > On Wed, 21 Jul 2021 12:42:14 +0100,
> > Robin Murphy <robin.mur...@arm.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> [ +Marc for MSI bits ]
> >>
> >> On 2021-07-21 02:33, Bixuan Cui wrote:
> >>> Add suspend and resume support for arm-smmu-v3 by low-power mode.
> >>>
> >>> When the smmu is suspended, it is powered off and the registers are
> >>> cleared. So saves the msi_msg context during msi interrupt initialization
> >>> of smmu. When resume happens it calls arm_smmu_device_reset() to restore
> >>> the registers.
> >>>
> >>> Signed-off-by: Bixuan Cui <cuibix...@huawei.com>
> >>> Reviewed-by: Wei Yongjun <weiyongj...@huawei.com>
> >>> Reviewed-by: Zhen Lei <thunder.leiz...@huawei.com>
> >>> Reviewed-by: Ding Tianhong <dingtianh...@huawei.com>
> >>> Reviewed-by: Hanjun Guo <guohan...@huawei.com>
> >>> ---
> >>>
> >>> drivers/iommu/arm/arm-smmu-v3/arm-smmu-v3.c | 72 ++++++++++++++++++---
> >>> 1 file changed, 64 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
> >>>
> >>> diff --git a/drivers/iommu/arm/arm-smmu-v3/arm-smmu-v3.c
> >>> b/drivers/iommu/arm/arm-smmu-v3/arm-smmu-v3.c
> >>> index 235f9bdaeaf2..bf1163acbcb1 100644
> >>> --- a/drivers/iommu/arm/arm-smmu-v3/arm-smmu-v3.c
> >>> +++ b/drivers/iommu/arm/arm-smmu-v3/arm-smmu-v3.c
> >>> @@ -40,6 +40,7 @@ MODULE_PARM_DESC(disable_bypass,
> >>> static bool disable_msipolling;
> >>> module_param(disable_msipolling, bool, 0444);
> >>> +static bool bypass;
> >>> MODULE_PARM_DESC(disable_msipolling,
> >>> "Disable MSI-based polling for CMD_SYNC completion.");
> >>> @@ -3129,11 +3130,37 @@ static void arm_smmu_write_msi_msg(struct
> >>> msi_desc *desc, struct msi_msg *msg)
> >>> doorbell = (((u64)msg->address_hi) << 32) | msg->address_lo;
> >>> doorbell &= MSI_CFG0_ADDR_MASK;
> >>> + /* Saves the msg context for resume if desc->msg is empty */
> >>> + if (desc->msg.address_lo == 0 && desc->msg.address_hi == 0) {
> >>> + desc->msg.address_lo = msg->address_lo;
> >>> + desc->msg.address_hi = msg->address_hi;
> >>> + desc->msg.data = msg->data;
> >>> + }
> >>
> >> My gut feeling is that this is something a device driver maybe
> >> shouldn't be poking into, but I'm not entirely familiar with the area
> >> :/
> >
> > Certainly not. If you rely on the message being stored into the
> > descriptors, then implement this in the core code, like we do for PCI.
>
> Ah, so it would be an acceptable compromise to *read* desc->msg (and
> thus avoid having to store our own copy of the message) if the core
> was guaranteed to cache it? That's good to know, thanks.
Yeah, vfio, a couple of other weird drivers and (*surprise!*) ia64 are
using this kind of trick. I don't see a reason not to implement that
for platform-MSI (although level signalling may be interesting...), or
even to move it into the core MSI code.
>
> >>> +
> >>> writeq_relaxed(doorbell, smmu->base + cfg[0]);
> >>> writel_relaxed(msg->data, smmu->base + cfg[1]);
> >>> writel_relaxed(ARM_SMMU_MEMATTR_DEVICE_nGnRE, smmu->base +
> >>> cfg[2]);
> >>> }
> >>> +static void arm_smmu_resume_msis(struct arm_smmu_device *smmu)
> >>> +{
> >>> + struct msi_desc *desc;
> >>> + struct device *dev = smmu->dev;
> >>> +
> >>> + for_each_msi_entry(desc, dev) {
> >>> + switch (desc->platform.msi_index) {
> >>> + case EVTQ_MSI_INDEX:
> >>> + case GERROR_MSI_INDEX:
> >>> + case PRIQ_MSI_INDEX:
> >>> + arm_smmu_write_msi_msg(desc, &(desc->msg));
> >
> > Consider using get_cached_msi_msg() instead of using the internals of
> > the descriptor.
>
> Oh, there's even a proper API for it, marvellous! I hadn't managed to
> dig that far myself :)
It is a bit odd in the sense that it takes a copy of the message
instead of returning a pointer, but at least this solves lifetime
issues.
Thanks,
M.
--
Without deviation from the norm, progress is not possible.
_______________________________________________
iommu mailing list
iommu@lists.linux-foundation.org
https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/iommu
