linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3 11/11] arm64: dts: qcom: sc7180: Add pdc interrupt controller

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]

Message-ID: <c214110f-7620-8771-ef83-8a4fb1f8724f@codeaurora.org>
Date:   Mon, 4 Nov 2019 12:26:38 +0530
From:   Rajendra Nayak <rnayak@...eaurora.org>
To:     Bjorn Andersson <bjorn.andersson@...aro.org>
Cc:     Matthias Kaehlcke <mka@...omium.org>,
        Stephen Boyd <swboyd@...omium.org>, agross@...nel.org,
        robh+dt@...nel.org, linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org,
        devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Maulik Shah <mkshah@...eaurora.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 11/11] arm64: dts: qcom: sc7180: Add pdc interrupt
 controller



On 11/4/2019 12:03 PM, Bjorn Andersson wrote:
> On Sun 03 Nov 22:17 PST 2019, Rajendra Nayak wrote:
> 
>>
>>
>> On 10/31/2019 1:20 AM, Matthias Kaehlcke wrote:
>>> On Tue, Oct 29, 2019 at 09:50:40AM -0700, Stephen Boyd wrote:
>>>> Quoting Rajendra Nayak (2019-10-23 02:02:19)
>>>>> From: Maulik Shah <mkshah@...eaurora.org>
>>>>>
>>>>> Add pdc interrupt controller for sc7180
>>>>>
>>>>> Signed-off-by: Maulik Shah <mkshah@...eaurora.org>
>>>>> Signed-off-by: Rajendra Nayak <rnayak@...eaurora.org>
>>>>> ---
>>>>> v3:
>>>>> Used the qcom,sdm845-pdc compatible for pdc node
>>>>
>>>> Everything else isn't doing the weird old compatible thing. Why not just
>>>> add the new compatible and update the driver? I guess I'll have to go
>>>> read the history.
>>>
>>> Marc Zyngier complained  on v2 about the churn from adding compatible
>>> strings for identical components, and I kinda see his point.
>>>
>>> I agree that using the 'sdm845' compatible string for sc7180 is odd too.
>>> Maybe we should introduce SoC independent compatible strings for IP blocks
>>> that are shared across multiple SoCs? If differentiation is needed SoC
>>> specific strings can be added.
>>
>> Sure, I will perhaps add a qcom,pdc SoC independent compatible to avoid
>> confusion.
>>
> 
> I agree,
> 
> compatible = "qcom,sc7180-pdc", "qcom,pdc";
> 
> is the way to go.

I wasn't planning on adding a qcom,sc7180-pdc, but instead just use the
qcom,pdc one for sc7180.

> 
> Reusing qcom,sdm845-pdc would prevent us from tackling any unforeseen
> issues/variations/erratas with one or the other platform in the future.

That was the intention of adding qcom,sc7180-pdc in the first place,
but Marc Zyngier was not happy with the churn, given there aren't really
any variations or erratas that we know of.

> 
> Regards,
> Bjorn
> 
>>
>> -- 
>> QUALCOMM INDIA, on behalf of Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member
>> of Code Aurora Forum, hosted by The Linux Foundation

-- 
QUALCOMM INDIA, on behalf of Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member
of Code Aurora Forum, hosted by The Linux Foundation