linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/3] remoteproc: qcom: pas: Use the same init resources for MSM8996 and MSM8998

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: <20210507164045.GA3622@thinkpad>
Date:   Fri, 7 May 2021 22:10:45 +0530
From:   Manivannan Sadhasivam <manivannan.sadhasivam@...aro.org>
To:     Yassine Oudjana <y.oudjana@...tonmail.com>
Cc:     Andy Gross <agross@...nel.org>,
        Bjorn Andersson <bjorn.andersson@...aro.org>,
        Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
        Ohad Ben-Cohen <ohad@...ery.com>,
        Mathieu Poirier <mathieu.poirier@...aro.org>,
        linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org, linux-remoteproc@...r.kernel.org,
        devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
        Konrad Dybcio <konrad.dybcio@...ainline.org>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, ~postmarketos/upstreaming@...ts.sr.ht
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] remoteproc: qcom: pas: Use the same init resources
 for MSM8996 and MSM8998

On Thu, May 06, 2021 at 09:18:04PM +0000, Yassine Oudjana wrote:
> The init resources for MSM8996 are missing power domains, and adding them
> makes the resources identical to the MSM8998 ones. Remove slpi_resource_init
> and use MSM8998 resources for both chips.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Yassine Oudjana <y.oudjana@...tonmail.com>
> ---
>  drivers/remoteproc/qcom_q6v5_pas.c | 15 ++-------------
>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 13 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/remoteproc/qcom_q6v5_pas.c b/drivers/remoteproc/qcom_q6v5_pas.c
> index b921fc26cd04..b1e613187c68 100644
> --- a/drivers/remoteproc/qcom_q6v5_pas.c
> +++ b/drivers/remoteproc/qcom_q6v5_pas.c
> @@ -689,17 +689,6 @@ static const struct adsp_data mpss_resource_init = {
>  	.ssctl_id = 0x12,
>  };
>  
> -static const struct adsp_data slpi_resource_init = {
> -		.crash_reason_smem = 424,
> -		.firmware_name = "slpi.mdt",
> -		.pas_id = 12,
> -		.has_aggre2_clk = true,
> -		.auto_boot = true,
> -		.ssr_name = "dsps",
> -		.sysmon_name = "slpi",
> -		.ssctl_id = 0x16,
> -};
> -
>  static const struct adsp_data sm8150_slpi_resource = {
>  		.crash_reason_smem = 424,
>  		.firmware_name = "slpi.mdt",
> @@ -803,8 +792,8 @@ static const struct adsp_data sdx55_mpss_resource = {
>  
>  static const struct of_device_id adsp_of_match[] = {
>  	{ .compatible = "qcom,msm8974-adsp-pil", .data = &adsp_resource_init},
> -	{ .compatible = "qcom,msm8996-adsp-pil", .data = &adsp_resource_init},
> -	{ .compatible = "qcom,msm8996-slpi-pil", .data = &slpi_resource_init},
> +	{ .compatible = "qcom,msm8996-adsp-pil", .data = &msm8998_adsp_resource},
> +	{ .compatible = "qcom,msm8996-slpi-pil", .data = &msm8998_slpi_resource},

NACK.

I see that the "slpi_resource_init" and "msm8998_{slpi/adsp}_resource" are
completely different, even the firmware name. How can you get it to work?

Thanks,
Mani

>  	{ .compatible = "qcom,msm8998-adsp-pas", .data = &msm8998_adsp_resource},
>  	{ .compatible = "qcom,msm8998-slpi-pas", .data = &msm8998_slpi_resource},
>  	{ .compatible = "qcom,qcs404-adsp-pas", .data = &adsp_resource_init },
> -- 
> 2.31.1
> 
>