linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] dt-bindings: arm,scmi: Do not use clocks for SCMI performance domains

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: <20201022182233.hklq6j5n5kkqg4yv@bogus>
Date:   Thu, 22 Oct 2020 19:22:33 +0100
From:   Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@....com>
To:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
        Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>
Cc:     linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
        Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] dt-bindings: arm,scmi: Do not use clocks for SCMI
 performance domains

On Wed, Oct 21, 2020 at 07:31:03PM +0100, Sudeep Holla wrote:
> Commit dd461cd9183f ("opp: Allow dev_pm_opp_get_opp_table() to return
> -EPROBE_DEFER") handles -EPROBE_DEFER for the clock/interconnects within
> _allocate_opp_table() which is called from dev_pm_opp_add and it
> now propagates the error back to the caller.
> 
> SCMI performance domain re-used clock bindings to keep it simple. However
> with the above mentioned change, if clock property is present in a device
> node, opps can't be added until clk_get succeeds. So in order to fix the
> issue, we can register dummy clocks which is completely ugly.
> 
> Since there are no upstream users for the SCMI performance domain clock
> bindings, let us introduce separate performance domain bindings for the
> same.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@....com>
> ---
>  .../devicetree/bindings/arm/arm,scmi.txt      | 19 ++++++++++++++++---
>  1 file changed, 16 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> 
> v1[1]->v2:
> 	- Changed the generic #perf-domain-cells to more SCMI specific
> 	  property #arm,scmi-perf-domain-cells
>

Is more specific #arm,scmi-perf-domain-cells acceptable ?
Sorry for the rush, but this fixes SCMI cpufreq which is broken after
commit dd461cd9183f ("opp: Allow dev_pm_opp_get_opp_table() to return
-EPROBE_DEFER")

-- 
Regards,
Sudeep