Re: [PATCH v7 2/6] iommu/arm-smmu: Add pm_runtime/sleep ops
Hi Tomasz, Please find my response inline below. On Tue, Feb 13, 2018 at 1:33 PM, Tomasz Figa wrote: > Hi Vivek, > > Thanks for the patch. Please see some comments inline. > > On Wed, Feb 7, 2018 at 7:31 PM, Vivek Gautam > wrote: >> From: Sricharan R >> >> The smmu needs to be functional only when the respective >> master's using it are active. The device_link feature >> helps to track such functional dependencies, so that the >> iommu gets powered when the master device enables itself >> using pm_runtime. So by adapting the smmu driver for >> runtime pm, above said dependency can be addressed. >> >> This patch adds the pm runtime/sleep callbacks to the >> driver and also the functions to parse the smmu clocks >> from DT and enable them in resume/suspend. >> >> Signed-off-by: Sricharan R >> Signed-off-by: Archit Taneja >> [vivek: Clock rework to request bulk of clocks] >> Signed-off-by: Vivek Gautam >> --- >> drivers/iommu/arm-smmu.c | 56 >> ++-- >> 1 file changed, 54 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/drivers/iommu/arm-smmu.c b/drivers/iommu/arm-smmu.c >> index 69e7c60792a8..9e2f917e16c2 100644 >> --- a/drivers/iommu/arm-smmu.c >> +++ b/drivers/iommu/arm-smmu.c >> @@ -48,6 +48,7 @@ >> #include >> #include >> #include >> +#include >> #include >> #include >> >> @@ -205,6 +206,8 @@ struct arm_smmu_device { >> u32 num_global_irqs; >> u32 num_context_irqs; >> unsigned int*irqs; >> + struct clk_bulk_data*clocks; >> + int num_clks; > > nit: Perhaps "num_clocks" to be consistent with "clocks"? > >> >> u32 cavium_id_base; /* Specific to >> Cavium */ >> >> @@ -1897,10 +1900,12 @@ static int arm_smmu_device_cfg_probe(struct >> arm_smmu_device *smmu) >> struct arm_smmu_match_data { >> enum arm_smmu_arch_version version; >> enum arm_smmu_implementation model; >> + const char * const *clks; >> + int num_clks; > > nit: Perhaps s/clks/clocks/ here or s/clocks/clks/ in struct arm_smmu_device? Sure. Will change to s/clocks/clks/ in struct arm_smmu_device. > >> }; >> >> #define ARM_SMMU_MATCH_DATA(name, ver, imp)\ >> -static struct arm_smmu_match_data name = { .version = ver, .model = imp } >> +static const struct arm_smmu_match_data name = { .version = ver, .model = >> imp } >> >> ARM_SMMU_MATCH_DATA(smmu_generic_v1, ARM_SMMU_V1, GENERIC_SMMU); >> ARM_SMMU_MATCH_DATA(smmu_generic_v2, ARM_SMMU_V2, GENERIC_SMMU); >> @@ -2001,6 +2006,7 @@ static int arm_smmu_device_dt_probe(struct >> platform_device *pdev, >> data = of_device_get_match_data(dev); >> smmu->version = data->version; >> smmu->model = data->model; >> + smmu->num_clks = data->num_clks; >> >> parse_driver_options(smmu); >> >> @@ -2039,6 +2045,28 @@ static void arm_smmu_bus_init(void) >> #endif >> } >> >> +static int arm_smmu_init_clks(struct arm_smmu_device *smmu) >> +{ >> + int i; >> + int num = smmu->num_clks; >> + const struct arm_smmu_match_data *data; >> + >> + if (num < 1) >> + return 0; >> + >> + smmu->clocks = devm_kcalloc(smmu->dev, num, >> + sizeof(*smmu->clocks), GFP_KERNEL); >> + if (!smmu->clocks) >> + return -ENOMEM; >> + >> + data = of_device_get_match_data(smmu->dev); >> + >> + for (i = 0; i < num; i++) >> + smmu->clocks[i].id = data->clks[i]; > > I'd argue that arm_smmu_device_dt_probe() is a better place for all > the code above, since this function is called regardless of whether > the device is probed from DT or not. Going further, > arm_smmu_device_acpi_probe() could fill smmu->num_clks and ->clocks > using ACPI-like way (as opposed to OF match data) if necessary. Right, it's valid to fill the data in arm_smmu_device_dt_probe(). Perhaps we can just keep the devm_clk_bulk_get() in arm_smmu_device_probe() at the point where we are currently doing arm_smmu_init_clks(). Thanks & regards Vivek > > Best regards, > Tomasz > -- > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-arm-msm" in > the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html -- QUALCOMM INDIA, on behalf of Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum, hosted by The Linux Foundation ___ dri-devel mailing list dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
Re: [PATCH v7 2/6] iommu/arm-smmu: Add pm_runtime/sleep ops
On Tue, Feb 13, 2018 at 7:25 PM, Vivek Gautam wrote: >>> +static int arm_smmu_init_clks(struct arm_smmu_device *smmu) >>> +{ >>> + int i; >>> + int num = smmu->num_clks; >>> + const struct arm_smmu_match_data *data; >>> + >>> + if (num < 1) >>> + return 0; >>> + >>> + smmu->clocks = devm_kcalloc(smmu->dev, num, >>> + sizeof(*smmu->clocks), GFP_KERNEL); >>> + if (!smmu->clocks) >>> + return -ENOMEM; >>> + >>> + data = of_device_get_match_data(smmu->dev); >>> + >>> + for (i = 0; i < num; i++) >>> + smmu->clocks[i].id = data->clks[i]; >> >> I'd argue that arm_smmu_device_dt_probe() is a better place for all >> the code above, since this function is called regardless of whether >> the device is probed from DT or not. Going further, >> arm_smmu_device_acpi_probe() could fill smmu->num_clks and ->clocks >> using ACPI-like way (as opposed to OF match data) if necessary. > > Right, it's valid to fill the data in arm_smmu_device_dt_probe(). > Perhaps we can just keep the devm_clk_bulk_get() in arm_smmu_device_probe() > at the point where we are currently doing arm_smmu_init_clks(). Sounds good to me. Thanks. Best regards, Tomasz ___ dri-devel mailing list dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
Re: [PATCH v7 2/6] iommu/arm-smmu: Add pm_runtime/sleep ops
Hi Vivek, Thanks for the patch. Please see some comments inline. On Wed, Feb 7, 2018 at 7:31 PM, Vivek Gautam wrote: > From: Sricharan R > > The smmu needs to be functional only when the respective > master's using it are active. The device_link feature > helps to track such functional dependencies, so that the > iommu gets powered when the master device enables itself > using pm_runtime. So by adapting the smmu driver for > runtime pm, above said dependency can be addressed. > > This patch adds the pm runtime/sleep callbacks to the > driver and also the functions to parse the smmu clocks > from DT and enable them in resume/suspend. > > Signed-off-by: Sricharan R > Signed-off-by: Archit Taneja > [vivek: Clock rework to request bulk of clocks] > Signed-off-by: Vivek Gautam > --- > drivers/iommu/arm-smmu.c | 56 > ++-- > 1 file changed, 54 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/iommu/arm-smmu.c b/drivers/iommu/arm-smmu.c > index 69e7c60792a8..9e2f917e16c2 100644 > --- a/drivers/iommu/arm-smmu.c > +++ b/drivers/iommu/arm-smmu.c > @@ -48,6 +48,7 @@ > #include > #include > #include > +#include > #include > #include > > @@ -205,6 +206,8 @@ struct arm_smmu_device { > u32 num_global_irqs; > u32 num_context_irqs; > unsigned int*irqs; > + struct clk_bulk_data*clocks; > + int num_clks; nit: Perhaps "num_clocks" to be consistent with "clocks"? > > u32 cavium_id_base; /* Specific to Cavium > */ > > @@ -1897,10 +1900,12 @@ static int arm_smmu_device_cfg_probe(struct > arm_smmu_device *smmu) > struct arm_smmu_match_data { > enum arm_smmu_arch_version version; > enum arm_smmu_implementation model; > + const char * const *clks; > + int num_clks; nit: Perhaps s/clks/clocks/ here or s/clocks/clks/ in struct arm_smmu_device? > }; > > #define ARM_SMMU_MATCH_DATA(name, ver, imp)\ > -static struct arm_smmu_match_data name = { .version = ver, .model = imp } > +static const struct arm_smmu_match_data name = { .version = ver, .model = > imp } > > ARM_SMMU_MATCH_DATA(smmu_generic_v1, ARM_SMMU_V1, GENERIC_SMMU); > ARM_SMMU_MATCH_DATA(smmu_generic_v2, ARM_SMMU_V2, GENERIC_SMMU); > @@ -2001,6 +2006,7 @@ static int arm_smmu_device_dt_probe(struct > platform_device *pdev, > data = of_device_get_match_data(dev); > smmu->version = data->version; > smmu->model = data->model; > + smmu->num_clks = data->num_clks; > > parse_driver_options(smmu); > > @@ -2039,6 +2045,28 @@ static void arm_smmu_bus_init(void) > #endif > } > > +static int arm_smmu_init_clks(struct arm_smmu_device *smmu) > +{ > + int i; > + int num = smmu->num_clks; > + const struct arm_smmu_match_data *data; > + > + if (num < 1) > + return 0; > + > + smmu->clocks = devm_kcalloc(smmu->dev, num, > + sizeof(*smmu->clocks), GFP_KERNEL); > + if (!smmu->clocks) > + return -ENOMEM; > + > + data = of_device_get_match_data(smmu->dev); > + > + for (i = 0; i < num; i++) > + smmu->clocks[i].id = data->clks[i]; I'd argue that arm_smmu_device_dt_probe() is a better place for all the code above, since this function is called regardless of whether the device is probed from DT or not. Going further, arm_smmu_device_acpi_probe() could fill smmu->num_clks and ->clocks using ACPI-like way (as opposed to OF match data) if necessary. Best regards, Tomasz ___ dri-devel mailing list dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel