linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v4 2/2] interconnect: qcom: Add SDM660 interconnect provider driver

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]

Date:   Tue, 3 Nov 2020 18:24:28 +0200
From:   Georgi Djakov <georgi.djakov@...aro.org>
To:     kholk11@...il.com
Cc:     bjorn.andersson@...aro.org, robh+dt@...nel.org, agross@...nel.org,
        marijns95@...il.com, konradybcio@...il.com,
        martin.botka1@...il.com, linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org,
        phone-devel@...r.kernel.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-pm@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 2/2] interconnect: qcom: Add SDM660 interconnect
 provider driver

On 10/17/20 16:37, kholk11@...il.com wrote:
> From: AngeloGioacchino Del Regno <kholk11@...il.com>
> 
> Introduce a driver for the Qualcomm interconnect busses found in
> the SDM630/SDM636/SDM660 SoCs.
> The topology consists of several NoCs that are controlled by a
> remote processor that collects the aggregated bandwidth for each
> master-slave pairs.
> 
> On a note, these chips are managing the "bus QoS" in a "hybrid"
> fashion: some of the paths in the topology are managed through
> (and by, of course) the RPM uC, while some others are "AP Owned",
> meaning that the AP shall do direct writes to the appropriate
> QoS registers for the specific paths and ports, instead of sending
> an indication to the RPM and leaving the job to that one.
> 
> Signed-off-by: AngeloGioacchino Del Regno <kholk11@...il.com>
> ---
>  drivers/interconnect/qcom/Kconfig  |   9 +
>  drivers/interconnect/qcom/Makefile |   2 +
>  drivers/interconnect/qcom/sdm660.c | 922 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>  3 files changed, 933 insertions(+)
>  create mode 100644 drivers/interconnect/qcom/sdm660.c
> 
[..]> +static const struct of_device_id sdm660_noc_of_match[] = {
> +	{ .compatible = "qcom,sdm660-a2noc", .data = &sdm660_a2noc },
> +	{ .compatible = "qcom,sdm660-bimc", .data = &sdm660_bimc },
> +	{ .compatible = "qcom,sdm660-cnoc", .data = &sdm660_cnoc },
> +	{ .compatible = "qcom,sdm660-gnoc", .data = &sdm660_gnoc },
> +	{ .compatible = "qcom,sdm660-mnoc", .data = &sdm660_mnoc },
> +	{ .compatible = "qcom,sdm660-snoc", .data = &sdm660_snoc },
> +	{ },
> +};
> +MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(of, sdm660_noc_of_match);
> +
> +static struct platform_driver sdm660_noc_driver = {
> +	.probe = qnoc_probe,
> +	.remove = qnoc_remove,
> +	.driver = {
> +		.name = "qnoc-sdm660",
> +		.of_match_table = sdm660_noc_of_match,

Just noticed that here we should set the sync_state callback:
		.sync_state = icc_sync_state,

I will fix it up before applying. Are you planning to send a patch
that adds the DT nodes?

Thanks,
Georgi

> +	},
> +};
> +module_platform_driver(sdm660_noc_driver);
> +MODULE_DESCRIPTION("Qualcomm sdm660 NoC driver");
> +MODULE_LICENSE("GPL v2");