On 5/4/22 14:52, Robin Murphy wrote:
> On 2022-05-04 01:52, Dmitry Osipenko wrote:
>> On 4/11/22 16:46, Robin Murphy wrote:
>>> @@ -1092,6 +1092,19 @@ static bool host1x_drm_wants_iommu(struct
>>> host1x_device *dev)
>>> struct host1x *host1x = dev_get_drvdata(dev->dev.parent);
>>> stru
On 2022-05-04 01:52, Dmitry Osipenko wrote:
On 4/11/22 16:46, Robin Murphy wrote:
@@ -1092,6 +1092,19 @@ static bool host1x_drm_wants_iommu(struct host1x_device
*dev)
struct host1x *host1x = dev_get_drvdata(dev->dev.parent);
struct iommu_domain *domain;
+ /* For starters, thi
On 4/11/22 16:46, Robin Murphy wrote:
> @@ -1092,6 +1092,19 @@ static bool host1x_drm_wants_iommu(struct
> host1x_device *dev)
> struct host1x *host1x = dev_get_drvdata(dev->dev.parent);
> struct iommu_domain *domain;
>
> + /* For starters, this is moot if no IOMMU is available *
On 4/11/22 16:46, Robin Murphy wrote:
> Refactor the confusing logic to make it both clearer and more robust. If
> the host1x parent device does have an IOMMU domain then iommu_present()
> is redundantly true, while otherwise for the 32-bit DMA mask case it
> still doesn't say whether the IOMMU dri
Refactor the confusing logic to make it both clearer and more robust. If
the host1x parent device does have an IOMMU domain then iommu_present()
is redundantly true, while otherwise for the 32-bit DMA mask case it
still doesn't say whether the IOMMU driver actually knows about the DRM
device or not
