RE: [PATCH 3/5] hw/arm/virt: Factor out common SMMUV3 dt bindings code

[Shameerali Kolothum Thodi]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Nicolin Chen <nicolinc@nvidia.com>
> Sent: Wednesday, April 16, 2025 5:26 AM
> To: Shameerali Kolothum Thodi <shameerali.kolothum.thodi@huawei.com>
> Cc: qemu-arm@nongnu.org; qemu-devel@nongnu.org;
> eric.auger@redhat.com; peter.maydell@linaro.org; jgg@nvidia.com;
> ddutile@redhat.com; berrange@redhat.com; nathanc@nvidia.com;
> mochs@nvidia.com; smostafa@google.com; Linuxarm
> <linuxarm@huawei.com>; Wangzhou (B) <wangzhou1@hisilicon.com>;
> jiangkunkun <jiangkunkun@huawei.com>; Jonathan Cameron
> <jonathan.cameron@huawei.com>; zhangfei.gao@linaro.org
> Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/5] hw/arm/virt: Factor out common SMMUV3 dt
> bindings code
> 
> On Tue, Apr 15, 2025 at 09:11:02AM +0100, Shameer Kolothum wrote:
> > No functional changes intended. This will be useful when we add
> > support for user-creatable smmuv3 device.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Shameer Kolothum
> <shameerali.kolothum.thodi@huawei.com>
> > ---
> >  hw/arm/virt.c | 55
> > +++++++++++++++++++++++++++------------------------
> >  1 file changed, 29 insertions(+), 26 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/hw/arm/virt.c b/hw/arm/virt.c index
> > a96452f17a..729f192558 100644
> > --- a/hw/arm/virt.c
> > +++ b/hw/arm/virt.c
> > @@ -1417,19 +1417,42 @@ static void create_pcie_irq_map(const
> MachineState *ms,
> >                             0x7           /* PCI irq */);
> >  }
> >
> > +static void create_smmuv3_dt_bindings(const VirtMachineState *vms,
> hwaddr base,
> > +                                      int irq) {
> > +    char *node;
> > +    const char compat[] = "arm,smmu-v3";
> > +    const char irq_names[] = "eventq\0priq\0cmdq-sync\0gerror";
> > +    MachineState *ms = MACHINE(vms);
> > +
> > +    node = g_strdup_printf("/smmuv3@%" PRIx64, base);
> > +    qemu_fdt_add_subnode(ms->fdt, node);
> > +    qemu_fdt_setprop(ms->fdt, node, "compatible", compat,
> sizeof(compat));
> > +    qemu_fdt_setprop_sized_cells(ms->fdt, node, "reg", 2, base, 2,
> > + 0x20000);
> 
> Nit: I would pass in the size from its caller, just to ease in the future when
> we need to add an instance supporting a different MMIO range.

Yes, that makes sense. And probably will use #define for the current size.

Thanks,
Shameer