Hi,
On Mon, Jul 25, 2016 at 5:39 PM, Matthias Brugger
wrote:
>
>
> On 20/07/16 05:01, Yong Wu wrote:
>>
>> Currently the iommu consumer always call iommu_present to get whether
>> the iommu is ready. But in MTK IOMMU, this function can't indicate
>> this. The IOMMU call bus_set_iommu->mtk_iommu_a
On Mon, 2016-07-25 at 10:39 +0200, Matthias Brugger wrote:
>
> On 20/07/16 05:01, Yong Wu wrote:
> > Currently the iommu consumer always call iommu_present to get whether
> > the iommu is ready. But in MTK IOMMU, this function can't indicate
> > this. The IOMMU call bus_set_iommu->mtk_iommu_add_de
On Mon, Jul 25, 2016 at 09:36:41AM +0100, Lorenzo Pieralisi wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 25, 2016 at 01:53:32PM +0800, Dennis Chen wrote:
> > Hi
> > On Wed, Jul 20, 2016 at 12:23:22PM +0100, Lorenzo Pieralisi wrote:
> > > This RFC patch series is v3 of a previous posting:
> > >
> > > https://lkml.org/lkml
The newly added DMA_ATTR_PRIVILEGED is useful for creating mappings that
are only accessible to privileged DMA engines. Implement it in
dma-iommu.c so that the ARM64 DMA IOMMU mapper can make use of it.
Signed-off-by: Mitchel Humpherys
---
Notes:
v3..v4
- Reworked against the new
The following patch to the ARM SMMU driver:
commit d346180e70b91b3d5a1ae7e5603e65593d4622bc
Author: Robin Murphy
Date: Tue Jan 26 18:06:34 2016 +
iommu/arm-smmu: Treat all device transactions as unprivileged
started forcing all SMMU transactions to come through as
The PL330 performs privileged instruction fetches. This can result in
SMMU permission faults on SMMUs that implement the ARMv8 VMSA, which
specifies that mappings that are writeable at one execution level shall
not be executable at any higher-privileged level. Fix this by using the
DMA_ATTR_PRIVI
This reverts commit d346180e70b9 ("iommu/arm-smmu: Treat all device
transactions as unprivileged") since some platforms actually make use of
privileged transactions.
Signed-off-by: Mitchel Humpherys
---
Notes:
v2..v3
- Moved to the end of the series.
drivers/iommu/arm-smmu.c | 5
This patch adds the DMA_ATTR_PRIVILEGED attribute to the DMA-mapping
subsystem.
Some advanced peripherals such as remote processors and GPUs perform
accesses to DMA buffers in both privileged "supervisor" and unprivileged
"user" modes. This attribute is used to indicate to the DMA-mapping
subsyst
From: Jeremy Gebben
Allow the creation of privileged mode mappings, for stage 1 only.
Signed-off-by: Jeremy Gebben
---
Notes:
v2..v3
- Use existing bit definitions.
drivers/iommu/io-pgtable-arm.c | 5 -
1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/drivers/i
Add the IOMMU_PRIV attribute, which is used to indicate privileged
mappings.
Signed-off-by: Mitchel Humpherys
---
Notes:
v2..v3
- Added comment
include/linux/iommu.h | 1 +
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
diff --git a/include/linux/iommu.h b/include/linux/iommu.h
index a35fb8b42
On Mon, Jul 25 2016 at 10:50:13 AM, Will Deacon wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 22, 2016 at 01:39:45PM -0700, Mitchel Humpherys wrote:
>> On Fri, Jul 22 2016 at 05:51:07 PM, Will Deacon wrote:
>> > On Tue, Jul 19, 2016 at 01:36:49PM -0700, Mitchel Humpherys wrote:
>> >> The following patch to the ARM SMMU d
Hi Thomas,
On 20/07/2016 11:09, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> On Tue, 19 Jul 2016, Eric Auger wrote:
>
> First of all - valid for all patches:
>
> Subject: sys/subsys: Sentence starts with an uppercase letter
OK understood.
>
> Now for this particular one:
>
> genirq/msi: use the MSI doorbell's IOV
Hi Thomas,
On 20/07/2016 11:04, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> On Tue, 19 Jul 2016, Eric Auger wrote:
>> /**
>> + * msi_handle_doorbell_mappings: in case the irq data corresponds to an
>> + * MSI that requires iommu mapping, traverse the irq domain hierarchy
>> + * to retrieve the doorbells to handle a
On Mon, Jul 25, 2016 at 04:51:00PM +0100, Robin Murphy wrote:
> On 25/07/16 16:41, Lorenzo Pieralisi wrote:
> [...]
> >>> diff --git a/include/linux/of_iommu.h b/include/linux/of_iommu.h
> >>> index 308791f..2362232 100644
> >>> --- a/include/linux/of_iommu.h
> >>> +++ b/include/linux/of_iommu.h
>
On Mon, Jul 25, 2016 at 10:21:10AM -0500, Rob Herring wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 25, 2016 at 10:09 AM, Robin Murphy wrote:
> > Hi Lorenzo,
> >
> > On 20/07/16 12:23, Lorenzo Pieralisi wrote:
> >> The iommu_fwspec structure, used to hold per device iommu configuration
> >> data is not OF specific and the
On 25/07/16 16:41, Lorenzo Pieralisi wrote:
[...]
>>> diff --git a/include/linux/of_iommu.h b/include/linux/of_iommu.h
>>> index 308791f..2362232 100644
>>> --- a/include/linux/of_iommu.h
>>> +++ b/include/linux/of_iommu.h
>>> @@ -15,13 +15,8 @@ extern void of_iommu_init(void);
>>> extern const st
On Mon, Jul 25, 2016 at 04:09:55PM +0100, Robin Murphy wrote:
> Hi Lorenzo,
>
> On 20/07/16 12:23, Lorenzo Pieralisi wrote:
> > The iommu_fwspec structure, used to hold per device iommu configuration
> > data is not OF specific and therefore can be moved to a generic
> > and OF independent compila
On Mon, Jul 25, 2016 at 10:09 AM, Robin Murphy wrote:
> Hi Lorenzo,
>
> On 20/07/16 12:23, Lorenzo Pieralisi wrote:
>> The iommu_fwspec structure, used to hold per device iommu configuration
>> data is not OF specific and therefore can be moved to a generic
>> and OF independent compilation unit.
Hi Lorenzo,
On 20/07/16 12:23, Lorenzo Pieralisi wrote:
> The iommu_fwspec structure, used to hold per device iommu configuration
> data is not OF specific and therefore can be moved to a generic
> and OF independent compilation unit.
>
> In particular, the iommu_fwspec handling hinges on the dev
On Fri, Jul 22, 2016 at 01:39:45PM -0700, Mitchel Humpherys wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 22 2016 at 05:51:07 PM, Will Deacon wrote:
> > On Tue, Jul 19, 2016 at 01:36:49PM -0700, Mitchel Humpherys wrote:
> >> The following patch to the ARM SMMU driver:
> >>
> >> commit d346180e70b91b3d5a1ae7e5603e6559
On 20/07/16 05:01, Yong Wu wrote:
Currently the iommu consumer always call iommu_present to get whether
the iommu is ready. But in MTK IOMMU, this function can't indicate
this. The IOMMU call bus_set_iommu->mtk_iommu_add_device->
mtk_iommu_attach_device to parse the iommu data, then it's able t
On Mon, Jul 25, 2016 at 01:53:32PM +0800, Dennis Chen wrote:
> Hi
> On Wed, Jul 20, 2016 at 12:23:22PM +0100, Lorenzo Pieralisi wrote:
> > This RFC patch series is v3 of a previous posting:
> >
> > https://lkml.org/lkml/2016/6/7/523
> >
> > v2 -> v3
> > - Rebased on top of dependencies series
Hi,
On 24/07/2016 03:41, kbuild test robot wrote:
> Hi,
>
> [auto build test ERROR on vfio/next]
> [also build test ERROR on v4.7-rc7 next-20160722]
> [if your patch is applied to the wrong git tree, please drop us a note to
> help improve the system]
>
> url:
> https://github.com/0day-ci/l
23 matches
Mail list logo