On Thu, Dec 24, 2020 at 8:35 PM Yong Wu [off-list ref] wrote:

On Wed, 2020-12-23 at 17:18 +0900, Tomasz Figa wrote:

quoted

On Wed, Dec 09, 2020 at 04:00:41PM +0800, Yong Wu wrote:

quoted

This patch adds decriptions for mt8192 IOMMU and SMI.

mt8192 also is MTK IOMMU gen2 which uses ARM Short-Descriptor translation
table format. The M4U-SMI HW diagram is as below:

                          EMI
                           |
                          M4U
                           |
                      ------------
                       SMI Common
                      ------------
                           |
  +-------+------+------+----------------------+-------+
  |       |      |      |       ......         |       |
  |       |      |      |                      |       |
larb0   larb1  larb2  larb4     ......      larb19   larb20
disp0   disp1   mdp    vdec                   IPE      IPE

All the connections are HW fixed, SW can NOT adjust it.

mt8192 M4U support 0~16GB iova range. we preassign different engines
into different iova ranges:

domain-id  module     iova-range                  larbs
   0       disp        0 ~ 4G                      larb0/1
   1       vcodec      4G ~ 8G                     larb4/5/7
   2       cam/mdp     8G ~ 12G             larb2/9/11/13/14/16/17/18/19/20

Why do we preassign these addresses in DT? Shouldn't it be a user's or
integrator's decision to split the 16 GB address range into sub-ranges
and define which larbs those sub-ranges are shared with?

The problem is that we can't split the 16GB range with the larb as unit.
The example is the below ccu0(larb13 port9/10) is a independent
range(domain), the others ports in larb13 is in another domain.

disp/vcodec/cam/mdp don't have special iova requirement, they could
access any range. vcodec also can locate 8G~12G. it don't care about
where its iova locate. here I preassign like this following with our
internal project setting.

Let me try to understand this a bit more. Given the split you're
proposing, is there actually any isolation enforced between particular
domains? For example, if I program vcodec to with a DMA address from
the 0-4G range, would the IOMMU actually generate a fault, even if
disp had some memory mapped at that address?

Why set this in DT?, this is only for simplifying the code. Assume we
put it in the platform data. We have up to 32 larbs, each larb has up to
32 ports, each port may be in different iommu domains. we should have a
big array for this..however we only use a macro to get the domain in the
DT method.

When replying this mail, I happen to see there is a "dev->dev_range_map"
which has "dma-range" information, I think I could use this value to get
which domain the device belong to. then no need put domid in DT. I will
test this.

My feeling is that the only part that needs to be enforced statically
is the reserved IOVA range for CCUs. The other ranges should be
determined dynamically, although I think I need to understand better
how the hardware and your proposed design work to tell what would be
likely the best choice here.

Best regards,
Tomasz

Thanks.

quoted

Best regards,
Tomasz

quoted

   3       CCU0    0x4000_0000 ~ 0x43ff_ffff     larb13: port 9/10
   4       CCU1    0x4400_0000 ~ 0x47ff_ffff     larb14: port 4/5

The iova range for CCU0/1(camera control unit) is HW requirement.

Signed-off-by: Yong Wu <yong.wu@mediatek.com>
Reviewed-by: Rob Herring <robh@kernel.org>
---
 .../bindings/iommu/mediatek,iommu.yaml        |  18 +-
 include/dt-bindings/memory/mt8192-larb-port.h | 240 ++++++++++++++++++
 2 files changed, 257 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
 create mode 100644 include/dt-bindings/memory/mt8192-larb-port.h

[snip]