linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 6/6] arm64: dts: qcom: sc7280: Add nodes to boot WPSS

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:   Sat, 13 Mar 2021 13:46:12 -0800
From:   Stephen Boyd <swboyd@...omium.org>
To:     Sibi Sankar <sibis@...eaurora.org>, bjorn.andersson@...aro.org,
        p.zabel@...gutronix.de, robh+dt@...nel.org
Cc:     agross@...nel.org, mani@...nel.org, linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org,
        devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Sibi Sankar <sibis@...eaurora.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 6/6] arm64: dts: qcom: sc7280: Add nodes to boot WPSS

Quoting Sibi Sankar (2021-03-08 21:51:51)
> Add miscellaneous nodes to boot the Wireless Processor Subsystem on

Maybe add (WPSS) after the name so we know they're related.

> SC7280 SoCs.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Sibi Sankar <sibis@...eaurora.org>
> ---
> 
> https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/linux-arm-msm/list/?series=438217
> Depends on ipcc dt node enablement from ^^ 
> 
>  arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sc7280.dtsi | 143 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>  1 file changed, 143 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sc7280.dtsi b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sc7280.dtsi
> index 18637c369c1d..4f03c468df51 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sc7280.dtsi
> +++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sc7280.dtsi
> @@ -244,12 +251,131 @@
>                 reg = <0 0x80000000 0 0>;
>         };
>  
> +       tcsr_mutex: hwlock {
> +               compatible = "qcom,tcsr-mutex";
> +               syscon = <&tcsr_mutex_regs 0 0x1000>;
> +               #hwlock-cells = <1>;
> +       };

Is this node in the right place? I think the node above it is 'memory'?
In which case 'hwlock' comes before 'memory' alphabetically.

> +
> +       smem {
> +               compatible = "qcom,smem";
> +               memory-region = <&smem_mem>;
> +               hwlocks = <&tcsr_mutex 3>;
> +       };
> +
>         firmware {
>                 scm {
>                         compatible = "qcom,scm-sc7280", "qcom,scm";
>                 };
>         };
>  
> +       smp2p-adsp {
> +               compatible = "qcom,smp2p";
> +               qcom,smem = <443>, <429>;
> +               interrupts-extended = <&ipcc IPCC_CLIENT_LPASS
> +                                            IPCC_MPROC_SIGNAL_SMP2P
> +                                            IRQ_TYPE_EDGE_RISING>;
> +               mboxes = <&ipcc IPCC_CLIENT_LPASS
> +                               IPCC_MPROC_SIGNAL_SMP2P>;
> +
> +               qcom,local-pid = <0>;
> +               qcom,remote-pid = <2>;
> +
> +               adsp_smp2p_out: master-kernel {
> +                       qcom,entry-name = "master-kernel";
> +                       #qcom,smem-state-cells = <1>;
> +               };
> +
> +               adsp_smp2p_in: slave-kernel {
> +                       qcom,entry-name = "slave-kernel";
> +                       interrupt-controller;
> +                       #interrupt-cells = <2>;
> +               };
> +       };
> +
> +       smp2p-cdsp {
> +               compatible = "qcom,smp2p";
> +               qcom,smem = <94>, <432>;
> +               interrupts-extended = <&ipcc IPCC_CLIENT_CDSP
> +                                            IPCC_MPROC_SIGNAL_SMP2P
> +                                            IRQ_TYPE_EDGE_RISING>;
> +               mboxes = <&ipcc IPCC_CLIENT_CDSP
> +                               IPCC_MPROC_SIGNAL_SMP2P>;
> +
> +               qcom,local-pid = <0>;
> +               qcom,remote-pid = <5>;
> +
> +               cdsp_smp2p_out: master-kernel {
> +                       qcom,entry-name = "master-kernel";
> +                       #qcom,smem-state-cells = <1>;
> +               };
> +
> +               cdsp_smp2p_in: slave-kernel {
> +                       qcom,entry-name = "slave-kernel";
> +                       interrupt-controller;
> +                       #interrupt-cells = <2>;
> +               };
> +       };
> +
> +       smp2p-mpss {
> +               compatible = "qcom,smp2p";
> +               qcom,smem = <435>, <428>;
> +               interrupts-extended = <&ipcc IPCC_CLIENT_MPSS
> +                                            IPCC_MPROC_SIGNAL_SMP2P
> +                                            IRQ_TYPE_EDGE_RISING>;
> +               mboxes = <&ipcc IPCC_CLIENT_MPSS
> +                               IPCC_MPROC_SIGNAL_SMP2P>;
> +
> +               qcom,local-pid = <0>;
> +               qcom,remote-pid = <1>;
> +
> +               modem_smp2p_out: master-kernel {
> +                       qcom,entry-name = "master-kernel";
> +                       #qcom,smem-state-cells = <1>;
> +               };
> +
> +               modem_smp2p_in: slave-kernel {
> +                       qcom,entry-name = "slave-kernel";

Do these names need to have 'master' and 'slave' in them? We're trying
to avoid these terms. See Documentation/process/coding-style.rst Section
4 naming.

> +                       interrupt-controller;
> +                       #interrupt-cells = <2>;
> +               };
> +
> +               ipa_smp2p_out: ipa-ap-to-modem {
> +                       qcom,entry-name = "ipa";
> +                       #qcom,smem-state-cells = <1>;
> +               };
> +
> +               ipa_smp2p_in: ipa-modem-to-ap {
> +                       qcom,entry-name = "ipa";
> +                       interrupt-controller;
> +                       #interrupt-cells = <2>;
> +               };
> +       };
> +