Re: [RFC 01/10] iommu: Add IOMMU device registry

[Thierry Reding]

On Thu, Jun 26, 2014 at 10:49:41PM +0200, Thierry Reding wrote:
> From: Thierry Reding <treding@xxxxxxxxxx>
> 
> Add an IOMMU device registry for drivers to register with and implement
> a method for users of the IOMMU API to attach to an IOMMU device. This
> allows to support deferred probing and gives the IOMMU API a convenient
> hook to perform early initialization of a device if necessary.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Thierry Reding <treding@xxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
>  drivers/iommu/iommu.c | 93 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>  include/linux/iommu.h | 27 +++++++++++++++
>  2 files changed, 120 insertions(+)

I thought that perhaps I should elaborate on this a bit since I have a
few ideas on how the API could be enhanced.

> +static int of_iommu_attach(struct device *dev)
> +{
> +	struct of_phandle_iter iter;
> +	struct iommu *iommu;
> +
> +	mutex_lock(&iommus_lock);
> +
> +	of_property_for_each_phandle_with_args(iter, dev->of_node, "iommus",
> +					       "#iommu-cells", 0) {
> +		bool found = false;
> +		int err;
> +
> +		/* skip disabled IOMMUs */
> +		if (!of_device_is_available(iter.out_args.np))
> +			continue;
> +
> +		list_for_each_entry(iommu, &iommus, list) {
> +			if (iommu->dev->of_node == iter.out_args.np) {
> +				err = iommu->ops->attach(iommu, dev);
> +				if (err < 0) {
> +				}
> +
> +				found = true;
> +			}
> +		}
> +
> +		if (!found) {
> +			mutex_unlock(&iommus_lock);
> +			return -EPROBE_DEFER;
> +		}
> +	}
> +
> +	mutex_unlock(&iommus_lock);
> +
> +	return 0;
> +}
> +
> +static int of_iommu_detach(struct device *dev)
> +{
> +	/* TODO: implement */
> +	return -ENOSYS;
> +}
> +
> +int iommu_attach(struct device *dev)
> +{
> +	int err = 0;
> +
> +	if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_OF) && dev->of_node) {
> +		err = of_iommu_attach(dev);
> +		if (!err)
> +			return 0;
> +	}
> +
> +	return err;
> +}
> +EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(iommu_attach);

I think it might make sense to introduce an explicit object for an IOMMU
master attachment. Maybe something like:

	struct iommu_master {
		struct iommu *iommu;
		struct device *dev;

		...
	};

iommu_attach() could then return a pointer to that attachment and the
IOMMU user driver could subsequently use that as a handle to access
other parts of the API.

The reason is that if we ever need to support more than a single master
interface (and perhaps even multiple master interfaces on different
IOMMUs) for a single device, then we need a way for the IOMMU user to
differentiate between its master interfaces.

> diff --git a/include/linux/iommu.h b/include/linux/iommu.h
> index 284a4683fdc1..ac2ceef194d4 100644
> --- a/include/linux/iommu.h
> +++ b/include/linux/iommu.h
> @@ -43,6 +43,17 @@ struct notifier_block;
>  typedef int (*iommu_fault_handler_t)(struct iommu_domain *,
>  			struct device *, unsigned long, int, void *);
>  
> +struct iommu {
> +	struct device *dev;
> +
> +	struct list_head list;
> +
> +	const struct iommu_ops *ops;
> +};

For reasons explained above, I also think that it would be a good idea
to modify the iommu_ops functions to take a struct iommu * as their
first argument. This may become important when one driver needs to
support multiple IOMMU devices. With the current API drivers have to
rely on global variables to track the driver-specific context. As far as
I can tell, only .domain_init(), .add_device(), .remove_device() and
.device_group(). .domain_init() could set up a pointer to struct iommu
in struct iommu_domain so the functions dealing with domains could gain
access to the IOMMU device via that pointer.

Thierry

Attachment: pgp0bYJ9epAT4.pgp
Description: PGP signature