linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 5/5] arm64: dts: qcom: sc7280: Add herobrine-r1

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: <CAE-0n50sX9-0MxcpF+3Rwqm75jSw5=aNwdsitLwE2sEA69jLJw@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Thu, 27 Jan 2022 13:16:10 -0800
From:   Stephen Boyd <swboyd@...omium.org>
To:     Bjorn Andersson <bjorn.andersson@...aro.org>,
        Doug Anderson <dianders@...omium.org>,
        Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>
Cc:     Konrad Dybcio <konrad.dybcio@...ainline.org>,
        kgodara@...eaurora.org, Matthias Kaehlcke <mka@...omium.org>,
        Sibi Sankar <sibis@...eaurora.org>,
        Prasad Malisetty <pmaliset@...eaurora.org>,
        quic_rjendra@...cinc.com, Andy Gross <agross@...nel.org>,
        Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-arm-msm <linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 5/5] arm64: dts: qcom: sc7280: Add herobrine-r1

Quoting Bjorn Andersson (2022-01-25 19:01:31)
> On Tue 25 Jan 15:46 PST 2022, Doug Anderson wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > On Tue, Jan 25, 2022 at 2:58 PM Stephen Boyd <swboyd@...omium.org> wrote:
> > >
> > > Quoting Douglas Anderson (2022-01-25 14:44:22)
> > > > diff --git a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sc7280-herobrine-herobrine-r1.dts b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sc7280-herobrine-herobrine-r1.dts
> > > > new file mode 100644
> > > > index 000000000000..f95273052da0
> > > > --- /dev/null
> > > > +++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sc7280-herobrine-herobrine-r1.dts
> > > > @@ -0,0 +1,313 @@
> > > > +// SPDX-License-Identifier: (GPL-2.0+ OR MIT)
> > > > +/*
> > > > + * Google Herobrine board device tree source
> > > > + *
> > > > + * Copyright 2022 Google LLC.
> > > > + */
> > > > +
> > > > +/dts-v1/;
> > > > +
> > > > +#include "sc7280-herobrine.dtsi"
> > > > +
> > > > +/ {
> > > > +       model = "Google Herobrine (rev1+)";
> > > > +       compatible = "google,herobrine", "qcom,sc7280";
> > >
> > > Can we stop adding "qcom,sc7280" to the board compatible string? It
> > > looks out of place. It's the compatible for the SoC and should really be
> > > the compatible for the /soc node.
> >
> > I don't have any objections, but I feel like this is the type of thing
> > I'd like Bjorn to have the final say on. What say you, Bjorn?
> >
>
> One practical case I can think of right away, where this matters is in
> cpufreq-dt-plat.c where we blocklist qcom,sc7280.
>
> I don't know if we rely on this in any other places, but I'm not keen on
> seeing a bunch of board-specific compatibles sprinkled throughout the
> implementation - it's annoying enough having to add each platform to
> these drivers.

Looking at sc7180, grep only shows cpufreq-dt-plat.c

 $ git grep qcom,sc7180\" -- drivers
 drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq-dt-platdev.c:   { .compatible = "qcom,sc7180", },

Simplest solution would be to look at / and /soc for a compatible
string.

 $ git grep -W 'soc[^:]*{' -- arch/arm*/boot/dts/ | grep compatible |
grep -v "simple-bus"

doesn't show many hits. The first hit is "ti,omap-infra" which is
actually inside an soc node, but even then I don't see anything that
matches the cpufreq-dt-plat.c lists.

----8<-----
diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq-dt-platdev.c
b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq-dt-platdev.c
index ca1d103ec449..32bfe453f8b4 100644
--- a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq-dt-platdev.c
+++ b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq-dt-platdev.c
@@ -179,25 +179,29 @@ static bool __init cpu0_node_has_opp_v2_prop(void)
 static int __init cpufreq_dt_platdev_init(void)
 {
 	struct device_node *np = of_find_node_by_path("/");
+	struct device_node *soc_np = of_find_node_by_path("/soc");
 	const struct of_device_id *match;
 	const void *data = NULL;

-	if (!np)
+	if (!np && !soc_np)
 		return -ENODEV;

 	match = of_match_node(allowlist, np);
-	if (match) {
+	if (match || (match = of_match_node(allowlist, soc_np))) {
 		data = match->data;
 		goto create_pdev;
 	}

-	if (cpu0_node_has_opp_v2_prop() && !of_match_node(blocklist, np))
+	if (cpu0_node_has_opp_v2_prop() && !of_match_node(blocklist, np) &&
+	    !of_match_node(blocklist, soc_np))
 		goto create_pdev;

+	of_node_put(soc_np);
 	of_node_put(np);
 	return -ENODEV;

 create_pdev:
+	of_node_put(soc_np);
 	of_node_put(np);
 	return PTR_ERR_OR_ZERO(platform_device_register_data(NULL, "cpufreq-dt",
 			       -1, data,