linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v9 2/8] dt-bindings: Introduce interconnect binding

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

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Wed, 26 Sep 2018 15:48:30 +0100
From:   Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@....com>
To:     Georgi Djakov <georgi.djakov@...aro.org>
Cc:     Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>, linux-pm@...r.kernel.org,
        gregkh@...uxfoundation.org, rjw@...ysocki.net,
        mturquette@...libre.com, khilman@...libre.com,
        vincent.guittot@...aro.org, skannan@...eaurora.org,
        bjorn.andersson@...aro.org, amit.kucheria@...aro.org,
        seansw@....qualcomm.com, daidavid1@...eaurora.org,
        evgreen@...omium.org, mark.rutland@....com,
        lorenzo.pieralisi@....com, abailon@...libre.com,
        maxime.ripard@...tlin.com, arnd@...db.de,
        devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v9 2/8] dt-bindings: Introduce interconnect binding

On Wed, Sep 26, 2018 at 05:42:15PM +0300, Georgi Djakov wrote:
> Hi Rob,
> 
> Thanks for the comments!
> 
> On 09/25/2018 09:02 PM, Rob Herring wrote:
> > On Fri, Aug 31, 2018 at 05:01:45PM +0300, Georgi Djakov wrote:
> >> This binding is intended to represent the relations between the interconnect
> >> controllers (providers) and consumer device nodes. It will allow creating links
> >> between consumers and interconnect paths (exposed by interconnect providers).
> > 
> > As I mentioned in person, I want to see other SoC families using this 
> > before accepting. They don't have to be ready for upstream, but WIP 
> > patches or even just a "yes, this works for us and we're going to use 
> > this binding on X".
> 
> Other than the 3 Qualcomm SoCs (msm8916, msm8996, sdm845) that are
> currently using this binding, there is ongoing work from at least two
> other vendors that would be using this same binding. I will check on
> what is their progress so far.
> 
> > Also, I think the QCom GPU use of this should be fully sorted out. Or 
> > more generically how this fits into OPP binding which seems to be never 
> > ending extended...
> 
> I see this as a further step. It could be OPP binding which include
> bandwidth values or some separate DT property. Jordan has already
> proposed something, do you have any initial comments on that?

I am curious as how this fits into new systems which have firmware driven
CPUFreq and other DVFS. I would like to avoid using this in such systems
and leave it upto the firmware to scale the bus/interconnect based on the
other components that are connected to it and active.

--
Regards,
Sudeep