On Tue, Jul 28, 2015 at 02:37:43PM +0100, Yong Wu wrote:
> On Tue, 2015-07-28 at 12:00 +0100, Will Deacon wrote:
> > On Tue, Jul 28, 2015 at 06:08:14AM +0100, Yong Wu wrote:
> > > On Mon, 2015-07-27 at 15:11 +0100, Will Deacon wrote:
> > > > On Mon, Jul 27, 2015 at 03:05:38PM +0100, Robin Murphy wrote:
> > > > > On 27/07/15 05:21, Yong Wu wrote:
> > > > > >>>>> + } else { /* page or largepage */
> > > > > >>>>> + if (quirk & IO_PGTABLE_QUIRK_SHORT_MTK) {
> > > > > >>>>> + if (large) { /* special Bit */
> > > > > >>>>
> > > > > >>>> This definitely needs a better comment! What exactly are you
> > > > > >>>> doing here
> > > > > >>>> and what is that quirk all about?
> > > > > >>>
> > > > > >>> I use this quirk is for MTK Special Bit as we don't have the XN
> > > > > >>> bit in
> > > > > >>> pagetable.
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> I'm still not really clear about what this is.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > There is some difference between the standard spec and MTK HW,
> > > > > > Our hw don't implement some bits, like XN and AP.
> > > > > > So I add a quirk for MTK special.
> > > > >
> > > > > When you say it doesn't implement these bits, do you mean that having
> > > > > them set will lead to Bad Things happening in the hardware, or that
> > > > > it
> > > > > will simply ignore them and not enforce any of the protections they
> > > > > imply? The former case would definitely want clearly documenting
> > > > > somewhere, whereas for the latter case I'm not sure it's even worth
> > > > > the
> > > > > complication of having a quirk - if the value doesn't matter there
> > > > > seems
> > > > > little point in doing a special dance just for the sake of semantic
> > > > > correctness of the in-memory PTEs, in my opinion.
> > > >
> > > > Agreed. We should only use quirks if the current (architecturally
> > > > compliant) code causes real issues with the hardware. Then the quirk can
> > > > be used to either avoid the problematic routines or to take extra steps
> > > > to make things work as the architecture intended.
> > > >
> > > > I've asked how this IOMMU differs from the architecture on a number of
> > > > occasions, but I'm still yet to receive a response other than "it's
> > > > special".
> > > >
> > >
> > > After check further with DE, Our pagetable is refer to ARM-v7's
> > > short-descriptor which is a little different from ARM-v8. like bit0(PXN)
> > > in section and supersection, I didn't read ARM-v7 spec before, so I add
> > > a MTK quirk to disable PXN bit in section and supersection.(if the PXN
> > > bit is wrote in ARM-v7 spec, HW will page fault.)
> >
> > I've been reviewing this using the ARMv7 ARM (Rev.C of DDI0406C) the whole
> > time. PXN is there as an optional field in non-LPAE implementations. That's
> > fine and doesn't require any quirks.
>
> Thanks for your confirm.
> Then I delete all the PXN bit in here?
>
> Take a example,
> #define ARM_SHORT_PGD_SECTION_XN (BIT(0) | BIT(4))
> I will change it to "BIT(4)".
Yes. Then the PXN bit can be added later as a quirk when we have an
implementation that supports it.
Will
_______________________________________________
iommu mailing list
iommu@lists.linux-foundation.org
https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/iommu
