linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 12/13] arm64: dts: add Allwinner A64 SoC .dtsi

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Fri, 9 Sep 2016 22:04:35 +0200
From:   Maxime Ripard <maxime.ripard@...e-electrons.com>
To:     Andre Przywara <andre.przywara@....com>
Cc:     Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>, Chen-Yu Tsai <wens@...e.org>,
        Mike Turquette <mturquette@...libre.com>,
        Stephen Boyd <sboyd@...eaurora.org>,
        devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-clk@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 12/13] arm64: dts: add Allwinner A64 SoC .dtsi

Hi,

On Thu, Sep 08, 2016 at 09:41:10AM +0100, Andre Przywara wrote:
> > +	timer {
> > +		compatible = "arm,armv8-timer";
> > +		interrupts = <GIC_PPI 13
> > +			(GIC_CPU_MASK_SIMPLE(4) | IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH)>,
> > +			     <GIC_PPI 14
> > +			(GIC_CPU_MASK_SIMPLE(4) | IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH)>,
> > +			     <GIC_PPI 11
> > +			(GIC_CPU_MASK_SIMPLE(4) | IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH)>,
> > +			     <GIC_PPI 10
> > +			(GIC_CPU_MASK_SIMPLE(4) | IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH)>;
> > +	};
> 
> Can you add a PMU node here? Or shall I send a patch on top of it?
> It would be:
> 
> 	pmu {
>         	compatible = "arm,cortex-a53-pmu", "arm,armv8-pmuv3";
> 		interrupts = <GIC_SPI 120 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>,
> 			     <GIC_SPI 121 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>,	
> 			     <GIC_SPI 122 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>,
> 			     <GIC_SPI 123 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>;
> 		interrupt-affinity = <&cpu0>,
> 				     <&cpu1>,
> 				     <&cpu2>,
> 				     <&cpu3>;
> 	};
> 
> This enables perf to use hardware counters (for cycles and instructions,
> for instance).
> 
> > +
> > +	clocks {
> > +		#address-cells = <1>;
> > +		#size-cells = <1>;
> > +		ranges;
> > +
> > +		osc24M: osc24M_clk {
> > +			#clock-cells = <0>;
> > +			compatible = "fixed-clock";
> > +			clock-frequency = <24000000>;
> > +			clock-output-names = "osc24M";
> > +		};
> > +
> > +		osc32k: osc32k_clk {
> > +			#clock-cells = <0>;
> > +			compatible = "fixed-clock";
> > +			clock-frequency = <32768>;
> > +			clock-output-names = "osc32k";
> > +		};
> > +	};
> 
> Can you remove this "clocks" node and put the two subnodes directly onto
> the top level?
> I know that putting clocks into a subnode is quite wide spread, but it
> does not represent any hardware hierarchy, especially in this
> fixed-clock case.
> So if we can (and it is easy here!) we should avoid any clocks subnode.
> 
> (Yes, I know that this was in my original DT as well, but Mark Rutland
> convinced me of this.)

I'll do those changes before sending the new version.

Maxime

-- 
Maxime Ripard, Free Electrons
Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering
http://free-electrons.com

Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (820 bytes)