On 15/08/2019 11:56, Will Deacon wrote:
On Fri, Aug 09, 2019 at 06:07:42PM +0100, Robin Murphy wrote:
Since we now use separate iommu_gather_ops for stage 1 and stage 2
contexts, we may as well divide up the monolithic callback into its
respective stage 1 and stage 2 parts.
Signed-off-by: Robin Murphy
---
drivers/iommu/arm-smmu.c | 66 ++--
1 file changed, 37 insertions(+), 29 deletions(-)
This will conflict with my iommu API batching stuff, but I can sort that
out if/when it gets queued by Joerg.
- if (cfg->fmt != ARM_SMMU_CTX_FMT_AARCH64) {
- iova &= ~12UL;
- iova |= cfg->asid;
- do {
- writel_relaxed(iova, reg);
- iova += granule;
- } while (size -= granule);
- } else {
- iova >>= 12;
- iova |= (u64)cfg->asid << 48;
- do {
- writeq_relaxed(iova, reg);
- iova += granule >> 12;
- } while (size -= granule);
- }
- } else {
- reg += leaf ? ARM_SMMU_CB_S2_TLBIIPAS2L :
- ARM_SMMU_CB_S2_TLBIIPAS2;
- iova >>= 12;
+ if (cfg->fmt != ARM_SMMU_CTX_FMT_AARCH64) {
+ iova &= ~12UL;
Oh baby. You should move code around more often, so I'm forced to take a
second look!
Oh dear lord... The worst part is that I do now remember seeing this and
having a similar moment of disbelief, but apparently I was easily
distracted with rebasing and forgot about it too quickly :(
Can you cook a fix for this that we can route separately, please? I see
it also made its way into qcom_iommu.c...
Sure, I'll split it out to the front of the series for the moment.
Robin.
___
iommu mailing list
iommu@lists.linux-foundation.org
https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/iommu
