On Fri, Aug 22, 2025 at 06:26:19PM +0200, Stephan Gerhold wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 22, 2025 at 08:36:11PM +0530, Mukesh Ojha wrote:
> > On Fri, Aug 22, 2025 at 10:46:20AM +0200, Stephan Gerhold wrote:
> > > On Fri, Aug 22, 2025 at 09:56:49AM +0530, Vikash Garodia wrote:
> > > > On 8/20/2025 7:09 PM, Stephan Gerhold wrote:
> > > > >>>> +int iris_fw_init(struct iris_core *core)
> > > > >>>> +{
> > > > >>>> + struct platform_device_info info;
> > > > >>>> + struct iommu_domain *iommu_dom;
> > > > >>>> + struct platform_device *pdev;
> > > > >>>> + struct device_node *np;
> > > > >>>> + int ret;
> > > > >>>> +
> > > > >>>> + np = of_get_child_by_name(core->dev->of_node, "video-firmware");
> > > > >>>> + if (!np)
> > > > >>>> + return 0;
> > > > >>> You need a dt-bindings change for this as well. This is documented
> > > > >>> only
> > > > >>> for Venus.
> > > > >> You are right, wanted to send device tree and binding support
> > > > >> separately.
> > > > >> But if required, will add with the series in the next version.
> > > > >>
> > > > > You can send device tree changes separately, but dt-binding changes
> > > > > always need to come before the driver changes.
> > > >
> > > > Do you mean to update the examples section[1] with the firmware subnode,
> > > > something similar to venus schema[2] ?
> > > >
> > >
> > > Sorry, I missed the fact that the "video-firmware" subnode is already
> > > documented for iris as well through qcom,venus-common.yaml (which is
> > > included for qcom,sm8550-iris). I don't think it's strictly required to
> > > add every possibility to the examples of the schema, since we'll also
> > > have the actual DTBs later to test this part of the schema.
> > >
> > > I would recommend to extend the description of the "video-firmware" node
> > > in qcom,venus-common.yaml a bit. You do use the reset functionality of
> > > TrustZone, so the description there doesn't fit for your use case.
> > >
> > > I think we will also have to figure out how to handle the old
> > > "ChromeOS"/"non_tz" use case (that resets Iris directly with the
> > > registers) vs the EL2 PAS use case (that resets Iris in TZ but still
> > > handles IOMMU from Linux). Simply checking for the presence of the
> > > "video-firmware" node is not enough, because that doesn't tell us if the
> > > PAS support is present in TZ.
> > >
> > > I have been experimenting with a similar patch that copies the "non_tz"
> > > code paths from Venus into Iris. We need this to upstream the Iris DT
> > > patch for X1E without regressing the community-contributed x1-el2.dtso,
> > > which doesn't have functional PAS when running in EL2.
> > >
> > > Perhaps we could check for __qcom_scm_is_call_available() with the new
> > > QCOM_SCM_PIL_PAS_GET_RSCTABLE to choose between invoking reset via PAS
> > > or directly with the registers. I don't have a device with the new
> > > firmware to verify if that works.
> >
> > You can check QCOM_SCM_PIL_PAS_GET_RSCTABLE with
> > __qcom_scm_is_call_available()
> > but there is a possibility that QCOM_SCM_PIL_PAS_GET_RSCTABLE SMC call will
> > be
> > used even for Gunyah. So, I believe, __qcom_scm_is_call_available() and
> > video-firmware's iommu property is also important.
> >
>
> Yeah, this sounds good.
>
> > >
> > > I'll try to send out my patch soon, so you can better see the context.
> >
> > Are you saying that you are going to send patch to support IRIS on
> > x1-el2.dtso in non-secure way i.e., non-PAS way.
> >
>
> The background is the following: I have a pending patch to add iris to
> x1e80100.dtsi, but that currently breaks x1-el2.dtso. My original plan
> was to disable &iris in x1-el2.dtso (because the PAS way seems to be
> just broken), but then I saw that e.g. sc7180-el2.dtso does have working
> Venus with the "video-firmware" node. Copy-pasting the "no_tz"(/non-PAS)
> code as-is from venus into iris works just fine for x1-el2.dtso, so
> disabling &iris in x1-el2.dtso just because the "no_tz" code is
> currently missing in iris doesn't sound right.
>
> As far as I understand the approach you use in this series does not work
> without the TZ changes for older platforms like X1E(?), so adding that
> code in iris seems to be the best way to move forward.
Yes, this series has dependency on firmware and will not work for older
platforms.
>
> I started working on a patch for this a while ago, it just needs a bit
> more cleanup. I'll try to finish it up and post it so we can discuss it
> further. I think the IOMMU management in my patch would even work as-is
> for you, you would just need to toggle a boolean to use the PAS instead
> of accessing the registers directly.
Sounds like a plan.
Thanks, please cc me when you send the patches; So, I could test along
with my changes and make dependency on it.
>
> Thanks,
> Stephan
--
-Mukesh Ojha
