linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 00/12] soc: mediatek: pm-domains: Add new driver for SCPSYS power domains 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: <f2185b28-0b1f-8cf9-8717-12e28cf2bbf0@gmail.com>
Date:   Fri, 9 Oct 2020 14:50:51 +0200
From:   Matthias Brugger <matthias.bgg@...il.com>
To:     Weiyi Lu <weiyi.lu@...iatek.com>
Cc:     Enric Balletbo i Serra <enric.balletbo@...labora.com>,
        devicetree@...r.kernel.org, drinkcat@...omium.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, fparent@...libre.com,
        Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
        linux-mediatek@...ts.infradead.org, hsinyi@...omium.org,
        Collabora Kernel ML <kernel@...labora.com>,
        linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/12] soc: mediatek: pm-domains: Add new driver for
 SCPSYS power domains controller



On 06/10/2020 08:53, Weiyi Lu wrote:
> On Fri, 2020-09-25 at 16:04 +0200, Matthias Brugger wrote:
>>
>> On 25/09/2020 12:06, Weiyi Lu wrote:
>>> On Thu, 2020-09-10 at 19:28 +0200, Enric Balletbo i Serra wrote:
>>>> Dear all,
>>>>
>>>> This is a new driver with the aim to deprecate the mtk-scpsys driver.
>>>> The problem with that driver is that, in order to support more Mediatek
>>>> SoCs you need to add some logic to handle properly the power-up
>>>> sequence of newer Mediatek SoCs, doesn't handle parent-child power
>>>> domains and need to hardcode all the clocks in the driver itself. The
>>>> result is that the driver is getting bigger and bigger every time a
>>>> new SoC needs to be supported.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Hi Enric and Matthias,
>>>
>>> First of all, thank you for the patch. But I'm worried the problem you
>>> mentioned won't be solved even if we work on this new driver in the
>>> future. My work on the MT8183 scpsys(now v17) is to implement the new
>>> hardware logic. Here, I also see related patches, which means that these
>>> new logics are necessary. Why can't we work on the original driver?
>>
>> Well the decision was to change the driver in a not compatible way to make
>> device tree entries better. If we work on the old driver, we would need to find
>> some creative ways to handle old bindings vs new bindings.
>>
>> So I thought it would be better doing a fresh start implementing mt1873 support
>> for reference and add mt8183 as new SoC. From what I have seen mt8192 and others
>> fit the driver structure too.
>>
>>> Meanwhile, I thought maybe we should separate the driver into general
>>> control and platform data for each SoC, otherwise it'll keep getting
>>> bigger and bigger if it need to be support new SoC.
>>>
>>
>> We could in a later series split the SoC depended data structures and put them
>> in drivers/soc/mediatek/pm-domains-mt8183.h or something like this. Is that what
>> you mean?
>>
> 
> Yes, that is what I want. And I guess it could avoid the collisions in
> the different defines to the control registers and power status bits you
> mentioned. Hope this will happen in this series.
> 

Sounds good to me. Enric could you move the soc specific data to separate 
include files?

Regards,
Matthias