linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] firmware: arm_scmi: Set clock latency to U32

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-Id: <165156489185.2921185.14872526406815086549.b4-ty@arm.com>
Date:   Tue,  3 May 2022 09:04:45 +0100
From:   Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@....com>
To:     Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@....com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Cc:     Cristian Marussi <cristian.marussi@....com>,
        linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] firmware: arm_scmi: Set clock latency to U32_MAX if it is not supported

On Thu, 28 Apr 2022 13:29:13 +0100, Sudeep Holla wrote:
> As per the spec, the clock_enable_delay is the worst case latency
> incurred by the platform to enable the clock. The value of 0 indicates
> that the platform doesn't support the same and must be considered as
> maximum latency for practical purposes.
> 
> Currently the value of 0 is assigned as is and is propogated to the clock
> framework which can assume that the clock can support atomic enable operation.
> 
> [...]


Applied to sudeep.holla/linux (for-next/scmi), thanks!

[1/1] firmware: arm_scmi: Set clock latency to U32_MAX if it is not supported
      https://git.kernel.org/sudeep.holla/c/7ad6b6ccba

--
Regards,
Sudeep