| lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
|
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Mon, 24 Sep 2018 21:42:29 +0100
From: Craig <ctatlor97@...il.com>
To: Bjorn Andersson <bjorn.andersson@...aro.org>
CC: linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org, Andy Gross <andy.gross@...aro.org>,
David Brown <david.brown@...aro.org>,
Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>, linux-soc@...r.kernel.org,
devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] arm64: dts: sdm630 SoC and Sony Pioneer (Xperia XA2) support
On 24 September 2018 20:19:29 BST, Bjorn Andersson <bjorn.andersson@...aro.org> wrote:
>On Sat 11 Aug 09:25 PDT 2018, Craig Tatlor wrote:
>
>> Initial device tree support for Qualcomm SDM630 SoC and
>> Sony Pioneer (Xperia XA2).
>>
>> SDM630 is based off of the SDM660 soc and all SDM660 specific drivers
>are
>> compatible with it. SDM660 is also based off of MSM8998 so it uses
>some
>> of its drivers aswell.
>
>Consider adding both sdm630 and sdm660 compatibles to the bindings and
>drivers and use the right one in the dts, in case we find details that
>differs in the future.
This includes pinctrl and GCC?
>
>>
>> The device tree is based on the CAF 4.4 kernel tree.
>>
>> The device can be booted into the initrd with a shell over UART.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Craig Tatlor <ctatlor97@...il.com>
>[..]
>> diff --git a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sdm630-pins.dtsi
>b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sdm630-pins.dtsi
>> new file mode 100644
>> index 000000000000..78b79c1076f1
>> --- /dev/null
>> +++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sdm630-pins.dtsi
>> @@ -0,0 +1,17 @@
>> +// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0
>> +/* Copyright (c) 2018, Craig Tatlor. */
>> +
>> +&tlmm {
>> + blsp1_uart1_default: blsp1_uart1_default {
>> + pinmux {
>> + pins = "gpio0", "gpio1", "gpio2", "gpio3";
>> + function = "gpio";
>
>Please put these in the sdm630.dtsi directly, rather than spreading the
>pins out in a separate file.
>
Okay, just followed what 8996 did
>> + };
>> +
>> + pinconf {
>> + pins = "gpio0", "gpio1", "gpio2", "gpio3";
>> + drive-strength = <2>;
>> + bias-disable;
>
>Please extend &blsp1_uart1_default in the pioneer dtsi with these
>"electrical properties".
Are you meaning to put this in the pioneer DTS or just drive strength and bias?
>
>> + };
>> + };
>> +};
>[..]
>> diff --git a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sdm630-pioneer.dtsi
>b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sdm630-pioneer.dtsi
>> new file mode 100644
>> index 000000000000..512792c23369
>> --- /dev/null
>> +++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sdm630-pioneer.dtsi
>> @@ -0,0 +1,22 @@
>> +// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0
>> +/* Copyright (c) 2018, Craig Tatlor. */
>> +
>> +#include "sdm630.dtsi"
>> +
>> +/ {
>> + aliases {
>> + serial0 = &blsp1_uart1;
>> + };
>> +
>> + chosen {
>> + stdout-path = "serial0:115200n8";
>> + };
>> +};
>> +
>> +&soc {
>> + serial@...0000 {
>
>Please reference this by &blsp1_uart1, rather than duplicating the
>hierarchy.
Okay, should the same still apply once more stuff is in soc? Or should I use references for them?
>
>> + status = "okay";
>> + pinctrl-names = "default";
>> + pinctrl-0 = <&blsp1_uart1_default>;
>> + };
>> +};
>> diff --git a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sdm630.dtsi
>b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sdm630.dtsi
>> new file mode 100644
>> index 000000000000..8a544979b7c0
>> --- /dev/null
>> +++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sdm630.dtsi
>> @@ -0,0 +1,383 @@
>> +// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0
>> +/* Copyright (c) 2018, Craig Tatlor. */
>> +
>> +#include <dt-bindings/interrupt-controller/arm-gic.h>
>> +#include <dt-bindings/clock/qcom,gcc-sdm660.h>
>> +
>> +/ {
>> + model = "Qualcomm Technologies, Inc. SDM630";
>
>We expect the board to always override this, so no need to specify it
>here.
Yup
>> +
>> + interrupt-parent = <&intc>;
>> +
>> + qcom,msm-id = <318 0x0>;
>> +
>> + #address-cells = <2>;
>> + #size-cells = <2>;
>> +
>> + chosen { };
>> +
>> + memory {
>> + device_type = "memory";
>> + /* We expect the bootloader to fill in the reg */
>> + reg = <0 0 0 0>;
>> + };
>> +
>> +
>
>Extra empty line.
Okay
>> + cpus {
>[..]
>> +
>> + timer {
>
>Please sort these nodes by name, except for "soc" which is convenient
>to have last.
Okay
>
>> + compatible = "arm,armv8-timer";
>> + interrupts = <GIC_PPI 1 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_LOW>,
>> + <GIC_PPI 2 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_LOW>,
>> + <GIC_PPI 3 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_LOW>,
>> + <GIC_PPI 0 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_LOW>;
>> + };
>[..]
>> + firmware {
>> + scm {
>> + compatible = "qcom,scm-sdm660";
>> + };
>> + };
>> +
>> +
>
>Extra empty line.
Okay
>
>> + rpm-glink {
>> + compatible = "qcom,glink-rpm";
>> +
>> + interrupts = <GIC_SPI 168 IRQ_TYPE_EDGE_RISING>;
>> +
>> + qcom,rpm-msg-ram = <&rpm_msg_ram>;
>> +
>> + mboxes = <&apcs_glb 0>;
>
>Remove a few of these extra empty lines and add the rpm_requests
>channel
>here while you're at it:
>
Sure
> rpm_requests: glink-channel {
> compatible = "qcom,rpm-sdm660";
> qcom,glink-channels = "rpm_requests";
> };
>
>> + };
>> +
>> + soc: soc {
>> + #address-cells = <1>;
>> + #size-cells = <1>;
>> + ranges = <0 0 0 0xffffffff>;
>> + compatible = "simple-bus";
>> +
>> + intc: interrupt-controller@...00000 {
>
>Please sort these nodes by base address.
>
Will do
>> + compatible = "arm,gic-v3";
>> + reg = <0x17a00000 0x10000>,
>> + <0x17b00000 0x100000>;
>> + #interrupt-cells = <3>;
>> + #address-cells = <1>;
>> + #size-cells = <1>;
>> + ranges;
>> + interrupt-controller;
>> + #redistributor-regions = <1>;
>> + redistributor-stride = <0x0 0x20000>;
>> + interrupts = <GIC_PPI 9 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>;
>> + };
>> +
>> + gcc: clock-controller@...000 {
>> + compatible = "qcom,gcc-sdm660";
>> + #clock-cells = <1>;
>> + #reset-cells = <1>;
>> + #power-domain-cells = <1>;
>> + reg = <0x100000 0x94000>;
>
>Please 0-pad addresses in "reg", makes it easier to sort them as well
>(but keep the @address after the node name unpadded)
Sure, how much should I pad up to?
>
>> + };
>> +
>[..]
>> + rpm_msg_ram: memory@...000 {
>> + compatible = "qcom,rpm-msg-ram";
>> + reg = <0x778000 0x7000>;
>> + };
>> +
>> + apcs_glb: mailbox@...11000 {
>> + compatible = "qcom,msm8998-apcs-hmss-global";
>
>Please update the apcs ipc driver with a sdm660 compatible and update
>this.
Right
>
>> + reg = <0x17911000 0x1000>;
>> +
>> + #mbox-cells = <1>;
>> + };
>
>Regards,
>Bjorn
Powered by blists - more mailing lists