| Message ID | 1546314952-15990-10-git-send-email-yong.wu@mediatek.com (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | New, archived |
| Headers | show |
| Series | MT8183 IOMMU SUPPORT | expand |
On Mon, Dec 31, 2018 at 7:58 PM Yong Wu <yong.wu@mediatek.com> wrote: > > The protect memory setting is a little different in the different SoCs. > In the register REG_MMU_CTRL_REG(0x110), the TF_PROT(translation fault > protect) shift bit is normally 4 while it shift 5 bits only in the > mt8173. This patch delete the complex MACRO and use a common if-else > instead. > > Also, use "F_MMU_TF_PROT_TO_PROGRAM_ADDR" instead of the hard code(2) > which means the M4U will output the dirty data to the programmed > address that we allocated dynamically when translation fault occurs. > > Signed-off-by: Yong Wu <yong.wu@mediatek.com> > --- > @Nicalos, I don't put it in the plat_data since only the previous mt8173 > shift 5. As I know, the latest SoC always use the new setting like mt2712 > and mt8183. Thus, I think it is unnecessary to put it in plat_data and > let all the latest SoC set it. Hence, I still keep "== mt8173" for this > like the reg REG_MMU_CTRL_REG. > --- > drivers/iommu/mtk_iommu.c | 12 +++++------- > 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/iommu/mtk_iommu.c b/drivers/iommu/mtk_iommu.c > index eca1536..35a1263 100644 > --- a/drivers/iommu/mtk_iommu.c > +++ b/drivers/iommu/mtk_iommu.c > @@ -53,11 +53,7 @@ > > #define REG_MMU_CTRL_REG 0x110 > #define F_MMU_PREFETCH_RT_REPLACE_MOD BIT(4) > -#define F_MMU_TF_PROTECT_SEL_SHIFT(data) \ > - ((data)->plat_data->m4u_plat == M4U_MT2712 ? 4 : 5) > -/* It's named by F_MMU_TF_PROT_SEL in mt2712. */ > -#define F_MMU_TF_PROTECT_SEL(prot, data) \ > - (((prot) & 0x3) << F_MMU_TF_PROTECT_SEL_SHIFT(data)) > +#define F_MMU_TF_PROT_TO_PROGRAM_ADDR 2 > > #define REG_MMU_IVRP_PADDR 0x114 > > @@ -521,9 +517,11 @@ static int mtk_iommu_hw_init(const struct mtk_iommu_data *data) > return ret; > } > > - regval = F_MMU_TF_PROTECT_SEL(2, data); > if (data->plat_data->m4u_plat == M4U_MT8173) > - regval |= F_MMU_PREFETCH_RT_REPLACE_MOD; > + regval = F_MMU_PREFETCH_RT_REPLACE_MOD | > + (F_MMU_TF_PROT_TO_PROGRAM_ADDR << 5); > + else > + regval = F_MMU_TF_PROT_TO_PROGRAM_ADDR << 4; I agree with Nicolas with regard to not having the random 4 and 5 sprinkled in the function. -Evan
diff --git a/drivers/iommu/mtk_iommu.c b/drivers/iommu/mtk_iommu.c index eca1536..35a1263 100644 --- a/drivers/iommu/mtk_iommu.c +++ b/drivers/iommu/mtk_iommu.c @@ -53,11 +53,7 @@ #define REG_MMU_CTRL_REG 0x110 #define F_MMU_PREFETCH_RT_REPLACE_MOD BIT(4) -#define F_MMU_TF_PROTECT_SEL_SHIFT(data) \ - ((data)->plat_data->m4u_plat == M4U_MT2712 ? 4 : 5) -/* It's named by F_MMU_TF_PROT_SEL in mt2712. */ -#define F_MMU_TF_PROTECT_SEL(prot, data) \ - (((prot) & 0x3) << F_MMU_TF_PROTECT_SEL_SHIFT(data)) +#define F_MMU_TF_PROT_TO_PROGRAM_ADDR 2 #define REG_MMU_IVRP_PADDR 0x114 @@ -521,9 +517,11 @@ static int mtk_iommu_hw_init(const struct mtk_iommu_data *data) return ret; } - regval = F_MMU_TF_PROTECT_SEL(2, data); if (data->plat_data->m4u_plat == M4U_MT8173) - regval |= F_MMU_PREFETCH_RT_REPLACE_MOD; + regval = F_MMU_PREFETCH_RT_REPLACE_MOD | + (F_MMU_TF_PROT_TO_PROGRAM_ADDR << 5); + else + regval = F_MMU_TF_PROT_TO_PROGRAM_ADDR << 4; writel_relaxed(regval, data->base + REG_MMU_CTRL_REG); regval = F_L2_MULIT_HIT_EN |
The protect memory setting is a little different in the different SoCs. In the register REG_MMU_CTRL_REG(0x110), the TF_PROT(translation fault protect) shift bit is normally 4 while it shift 5 bits only in the mt8173. This patch delete the complex MACRO and use a common if-else instead. Also, use "F_MMU_TF_PROT_TO_PROGRAM_ADDR" instead of the hard code(2) which means the M4U will output the dirty data to the programmed address that we allocated dynamically when translation fault occurs. Signed-off-by: Yong Wu <yong.wu@mediatek.com> --- @Nicalos, I don't put it in the plat_data since only the previous mt8173 shift 5. As I know, the latest SoC always use the new setting like mt2712 and mt8183. Thus, I think it is unnecessary to put it in plat_data and let all the latest SoC set it. Hence, I still keep "== mt8173" for this like the reg REG_MMU_CTRL_REG. --- drivers/iommu/mtk_iommu.c | 12 +++++------- 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)