On 2020-10-23 06:57, chao hao wrote:
On Wed, 2020-10-21 at 17:55 +0100, Robin Murphy wrote:
On 2020-10-19 12:30, Chao Hao wrote:
MTK_IOMMU driver writes one page entry and does tlb flush at a time
currently. More optimal would be to aggregate the writes and flush
BUS buffer in the end.
On Fri, 2020-10-23 at 13:57 +0800, chao hao wrote:
> On Wed, 2020-10-21 at 17:55 +0100, Robin Murphy wrote:
> > On 2020-10-19 12:30, Chao Hao wrote:
> > > MTK_IOMMU driver writes one page entry and does tlb flush at a time
> > > currently. More optimal would be to aggregate the writes and flush
>
On Wed, 2020-10-21 at 17:55 +0100, Robin Murphy wrote:
> On 2020-10-19 12:30, Chao Hao wrote:
> > MTK_IOMMU driver writes one page entry and does tlb flush at a time
> > currently. More optimal would be to aggregate the writes and flush
> > BUS buffer in the end.
>
> That's exactly what
On 2020-10-19 12:30, Chao Hao wrote:
MTK_IOMMU driver writes one page entry and does tlb flush at a time
currently. More optimal would be to aggregate the writes and flush
BUS buffer in the end.
That's exactly what iommu_iotlb_gather_add_page() is meant to achieve.
Rather than jumping
MTK_IOMMU driver writes one page entry and does tlb flush at a time
currently. More optimal would be to aggregate the writes and flush
BUS buffer in the end.
For 50MB buffer mapping, if mtk_iommu driver use iotlb_sync_range()
instead of tlb_add_range() and tlb_flush_walk/leaf(), it can increase
