On Fri, Aug 22, 2025 at 10:10:30PM +0530, Mukesh Ojha wrote:
> 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.
>
Krzysztof raised the concern that we shouldn't model the IOMMU specifier
for the firmware using a "video-firmware" subnode [1], similar to the
discussion for the "non-pixel" subnode recently [2].
I mostly finished up the cleanup of my patch, but I don't see any point
in posting it without an alternative proposal for the dt-bindings. For
this case, I think a simple property like
firmware-iommus = <&apps_smmu ...>;
instead of
video-firmware {
iommus = <&apps_smmu ...>;
};
could perhaps work. (XYZ-iommus isn't standardized at the moment, but I
think something like XYZ-gpios would make sense in this case. There are
many other possible approaches as well though.)
Unfortunately, I won't have enough time in the next weeks to fully
implement and propose an alternative. I'm assuming you still have
ongoing work for supporting the "non-pixel" IOMMU, perhaps your new
approach can be adapted for video-firmware as well?
I've pushed my current patch to a branch in case it helps. It's similar
to yours, but it has no external dependencies except for a fix in iris
I sent recently ("media: iris: Fix firmware reference leak and unmap
memory after load" [3]). You could use the non-PAS use case as a basis
to add the initial implementation in iris independent of this larger
patch series.
https://git.codelinaro.org/stephan.gerhold/linux/-/commit/1e068f5864d958ab9e807e6e3772b778cd0edea8.patch
For the PAS+IOMMU use case, it should be enough to set core->use_tz to
true, plus any changes needed for the SHM bridge (and maybe resource
table). The IOMMU management is independent from core->use_tz.
I'm also happy to add the non-PAS approach later on top of your changes,
whatever works best for you. :)
Thanks,
Stephan
[1]:
https://lore.kernel.org/r/20250823155349.22344-2-krzysztof.kozlow...@linaro.org/
[2]:
https://lore.kernel.org/r/20250627-video_cb-v3-0-51e18c0ff...@quicinc.com/T/
[3]:
https://lore.kernel.org/r/20250818-iris-firmware-leak-v1-1-1e3f9b8d3...@linaro.org/
