linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v6 00/12] ARM/MIPS: DTS: add child nodes describing the PVRSGX GPU present in some OMAP SoC and JZ4780 (and many more)

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: <20200421173938.GZ37466@atomide.com>
Date:   Tue, 21 Apr 2020 10:39:38 -0700
From:   Tony Lindgren <tony@...mide.com>
To:     "H. Nikolaus Schaller" <hns@...delico.com>
Cc:     Maxime Ripard <maxime@...no.tech>,
        Philipp Rossak <embed3d@...il.com>,
        Jonathan Bakker <xc-racer2@...e.ca>,
        David Airlie <airlied@...ux.ie>,
        Daniel Vetter <daniel@...ll.ch>,
        Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
        Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
        Benoît Cousson <bcousson@...libre.com>,
        Paul Cercueil <paul@...pouillou.net>,
        Ralf Baechle <ralf@...ux-mips.org>,
        Paul Burton <paulburton@...nel.org>,
        James Hogan <jhogan@...nel.org>, Kukjin Kim <kgene@...nel.org>,
        Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@...nel.org>,
        Chen-Yu Tsai <wens@...e.org>,
        Thomas Bogendoerfer <tsbogend@...ha.franken.de>,
        "open list:DRM PANEL DRIVERS" <dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org>,
        "open list:OPEN FIRMWARE AND FLATTENED DEVICE TREE BINDINGS" 
        <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        linux-omap <linux-omap@...r.kernel.org>,
        OpenPVRSGX Linux Driver Group <openpvrsgx-devgroup@...ux.org>,
        Discussions about the Letux Kernel 
        <letux-kernel@...nphoenux.org>, kernel@...a-handheld.com,
        linux-mips@...r.kernel.org,
        arm-soc <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
        linux-samsung-soc@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 00/12] ARM/MIPS: DTS: add child nodes describing the
 PVRSGX GPU present in some OMAP SoC and JZ4780 (and many more)

* H. Nikolaus Schaller <hns@...delico.com> [200421 17:31]:
> > Am 21.04.2020 um 16:15 schrieb Tony Lindgren <tony@...mide.com>:
> > Note that on omaps there are actually SoC module specific registers.
> 
> Ah, I see. This is of course a difference that the TI glue logic has
> its own registers in the same address range as the sgx and this can't
> be easily handled by a common sgx driver.
> 
> This indeed seems to be unique with omap.
> 
> > And there can be multiple devices within a single target module on
> > omaps. So the extra dts node and device is justified there.
> > 
> > For other SoCs, the SGX clocks are probably best handled directly
> > in pvr-drv.c PM runtime functions unless a custom hardware wrapper
> > with SoC specific registers exists.
> 
> That is why we need to evaluate what the better strategy is.
> 
> So we have
> a) omap which has a custom wrapper around the sgx
> b) others without, i.e. an empty (or pass-through) wrapper
> 
> Which one do we make the "standard" and which one the "exception"?
> What are good reasons for either one?

The wrapper is already handled by the ti-sysc binding, the sgx
binding should be standard with optional clocks.

See for example the standard 8250 uart for am335x with:

$ git grep -B20 -A10 uart0 arch/arm/boot/dts/am33xx-l4.dtsi

The 8250 device configuration is described in the standard 8250
dts binding, and the am335x module in the ti-sysc binding.
The are separate devices :)

So for the sgx binding, you can just leave out TI specific
module wrapper completely from the example.

> It also allows to handle different number of clocks (A31 seems to
> need 4, Samsung, A83 and JZ4780 one) without changing the sgx bindings
> or making big lists of conditionals. This variance would be handled
> outside the sgx core bindings and driver.

Well if other SoCs implement genpd domains etc, that's then
again part of a separate binding and not part of the sgx binding.

Regards,

Tony