Hi Will,

On Mon, Oct 1, 2018 at 6:29 PM Will Deacon [off-list ref] wrote:

Hi Vivek,

On Thu, Aug 30, 2018 at 08:15:38PM +0530, Vivek Gautam wrote:

quoted

From: Sricharan R <redacted>

The smmu device probe/remove and add/remove master device callbacks
gets called when the smmu is not linked to its master, that is without
the context of the master device. So calling runtime apis in those places
separately.
Global locks are also initialized before enabling runtime pm as the
runtime_resume() calls device_reset() which does tlb_sync_global()
that ultimately requires locks to be initialized.

Signed-off-by: Sricharan R <redacted>
[vivek: Cleanup pm runtime calls]
Signed-off-by: Vivek Gautam <redacted>
Reviewed-by: Tomasz Figa <tfiga@chromium.org>
Tested-by: Srinivas Kandagatla <redacted>
---
 drivers/iommu/arm-smmu.c | 89 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-----
 1 file changed, 81 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)

This doesn't apply on my tree[1], possibly because I've got Robin's non-strict
invalidation queued there. However, that got me thinking -- how does this
work in conjunction with the timer-based TLB invalidation? Do we need to
rpm_{get,put} around flush_iotlb_all()? If so, do we still need the calls
in map/unmap when non-strict mode is in use?

I haven't tested things with flush queues, but from what it looks like
both .flush_iotlb_all, and .iotlb_sync callbacks need rpm_get/put().
I will respin the patches.

Thanks
Vivek

Will

[1] https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/will/linux.git/log/?h=for-joerg/arm-smmu/updates

-- 
QUALCOMM INDIA, on behalf of Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member
of Code Aurora Forum, hosted by The Linux Foundation
_______________________________________________
Freedreno mailing list
Freedreno@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/freedreno