linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/2] arm64: tegra: Add Tegra234 GPCDMA device tree node

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: <6510d8be-38a7-8470-d832-15b948671703@nvidia.com>
Date:   Fri, 13 May 2022 09:39:31 +0100
From:   Jon Hunter <jonathanh@...dia.com>
To:     Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@...aro.org>,
        Akhil R <akhilrajeev@...dia.com>, robh+dt@...nel.org,
        krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org, thierry.reding@...il.com,
        devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-tegra@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] arm64: tegra: Add Tegra234 GPCDMA device tree node


On 13/05/2022 09:32, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> On 12/05/2022 11:00, Akhil R wrote:
>> Add device tree nodes for Tegra234 GPCDMA
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Akhil R <akhilrajeev@...dia.com>
>> ---
>>   arch/arm64/boot/dts/nvidia/tegra234.dtsi | 43 ++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>   1 file changed, 43 insertions(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/nvidia/tegra234.dtsi b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/nvidia/tegra234.dtsi
>> index cb3af539e477..860c3cc68cea 100644
>> --- a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/nvidia/tegra234.dtsi
>> +++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/nvidia/tegra234.dtsi
>> @@ -21,6 +21,49 @@
>>   
>>   		ranges = <0x0 0x0 0x0 0x40000000>;
>>   
>> +		gpcdma: dma-controller@...0000 {
>> +			compatible = "nvidia,tegra194-gpcdma",
>> +				      "nvidia,tegra186-gpcdma";
>> +			reg = <0x2600000 0x210000>;
>> +			resets = <&bpmp TEGRA234_RESET_GPCDMA>;
>> +			reset-names = "gpcdma";
>> +			interrupts = <GIC_SPI 76 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>,
>> +				     <GIC_SPI 77 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>,
>> +				     <GIC_SPI 78 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>,
>> +				     <GIC_SPI 79 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>,
>> +				     <GIC_SPI 80 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>,
>> +				     <GIC_SPI 81 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>,
>> +				     <GIC_SPI 82 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>,
>> +				     <GIC_SPI 83 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>,
>> +				     <GIC_SPI 84 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>,
>> +				     <GIC_SPI 85 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>,
>> +				     <GIC_SPI 86 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>,
>> +				     <GIC_SPI 87 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>,
>> +				     <GIC_SPI 88 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>,
>> +				     <GIC_SPI 89 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>,
>> +				     <GIC_SPI 90 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>,
>> +				     <GIC_SPI 91 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>,
>> +				     <GIC_SPI 92 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>,
>> +				     <GIC_SPI 93 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>,
>> +				     <GIC_SPI 94 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>,
>> +				     <GIC_SPI 95 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>,
>> +				     <GIC_SPI 96 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>,
>> +				     <GIC_SPI 97 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>,
>> +				     <GIC_SPI 98 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>,
>> +				     <GIC_SPI 99 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>,
>> +				     <GIC_SPI 100 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>,
>> +				     <GIC_SPI 101 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>,
>> +				     <GIC_SPI 102 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>,
>> +				     <GIC_SPI 103 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>,
>> +				     <GIC_SPI 104 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>,
>> +				     <GIC_SPI 105 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>,
>> +				     <GIC_SPI 106 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>;
>> +			#dma-cells = <1>;
>> +			iommus = <&smmu_niso0 TEGRA234_SID_GPCDMA>;
>> +			dma-coherent;
>> +			status = "okay";
> 
> okay is by default for new nodes.

Just so I know, is it recommended then to drop the status in this case 
or is it OK to leave as is?

Jon

-- 
nvpublic