linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH V3 3/3] mailbox: qcom-apcs: Add SM6125 compatible

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: <CABb+yY3BYYC2na8EFunEeu0XCfLXrUQon=hF3q5p=+FUoigoyw@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Sun, 20 Jun 2021 23:03:04 -0500
From:   Jassi Brar <jassisinghbrar@...il.com>
To:     Martin Botka <martin.botka@...ainline.org>
Cc:     ~postmarketos/upstreaming@...ts.sr.ht,
        konrad.dybcio@...ainline.org,
        angelogioacchino.delregno@...ainline.org,
        marijn.suijten@...ainline.org, jamipkettunen@...ainline.org,
        Andy Gross <agross@...nel.org>,
        Bjorn Andersson <bjorn.andersson@...aro.org>,
        linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH V3 3/3] mailbox: qcom-apcs: Add SM6125 compatible

On Sat, Jun 12, 2021 at 4:46 AM Martin Botka
<martin.botka@...ainline.org> wrote:
>
> This commit adds compatible for the SM6125 SoC
>
> Signed-off-by: Martin Botka <martin.botka@...ainline.org>
> ---
> Changes in V2:
> None
> Changes in V3:
> Change compatible to apcs-hmss-global
>  drivers/mailbox/qcom-apcs-ipc-mailbox.c | 5 +++++
>  1 file changed, 5 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/mailbox/qcom-apcs-ipc-mailbox.c b/drivers/mailbox/qcom-apcs-ipc-mailbox.c
> index f25324d03842..f24c5ad8d658 100644
> --- a/drivers/mailbox/qcom-apcs-ipc-mailbox.c
> +++ b/drivers/mailbox/qcom-apcs-ipc-mailbox.c
> @@ -57,6 +57,10 @@ static const struct qcom_apcs_ipc_data sdm660_apcs_data = {
>         .offset = 8, .clk_name = NULL
>  };
>
> +static const struct qcom_apcs_ipc_data sm6125_apcs_data = {
> +       .offset = 8, .clk_name = NULL
> +};
> +
>  static const struct qcom_apcs_ipc_data apps_shared_apcs_data = {
>         .offset = 12, .clk_name = NULL
>  };
> @@ -166,6 +170,7 @@ static const struct of_device_id qcom_apcs_ipc_of_match[] = {
>         { .compatible = "qcom,sc8180x-apss-shared", .data = &apps_shared_apcs_data },
>         { .compatible = "qcom,sdm660-apcs-hmss-global", .data = &sdm660_apcs_data },
>         { .compatible = "qcom,sdm845-apss-shared", .data = &apps_shared_apcs_data },
> +       { .compatible = "qcom,sm6125-apcs-hmss-global", .data = &sm6125_apcs_data },
>         { .compatible = "qcom,sm8150-apss-shared", .data = &apps_shared_apcs_data },
>         { .compatible = "qcom,sdx55-apcs-gcc", .data = &sdx55_apcs_data },
>         {}
>
These all are basically different names for the same controller.
The 'offset' is a configuration parameter and the 'clock', when NULL,
is basically some "always-on" clock.
I am sure we wouldn't be doing it, if the controller was third-party.

-Jassi