linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] arm64: dts: qcom: qcs404: fix default pinctrl settings for blsp1

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: <Yr56z//ZBcvj2wFb@matsya>
Date:   Fri, 1 Jul 2022 10:10:47 +0530
From:   Vinod Koul <vkoul@...nel.org>
To:     Bjorn Andersson <bjorn.andersson@...aro.org>
Cc:     Andrey Konovalov <andrey.konovalov@...aro.org>, agross@...nel.org,
        robh+dt@...nel.org, krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org,
        linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] arm64: dts: qcom: qcs404: fix default pinctrl settings
 for blsp1_spi1

On 30-06-22, 09:18, Bjorn Andersson wrote:
> On Wed 22 Jun 00:18 CDT 2022, Vinod Koul wrote:
> 
> > On 11-06-22, 22:57, Andrey Konovalov wrote:
> > > The current settings refer to "blsp_spi1" function which isn't defined.
> > > For this reason an attempt to enable blsp1_spi1 interface results in
> > > the probe failure below:
> > > 
> > > [    3.492900] qcs404-pinctrl 1000000.pinctrl: invalid function blsp_spi1 in map table
> > > [    3.502460] qcs404-pinctrl 1000000.pinctrl: invalid function blsp_spi1 in map table
> > > [    3.517725] qcs404-pinctrl 1000000.pinctrl: invalid function blsp_spi1 in map table
> > > [    3.532998] qcs404-pinctrl 1000000.pinctrl: invalid function blsp_spi1 in map table
> > > [    3.548277] spi_qup: probe of 78b6000.spi failed with error -22
> > > 
> > > Fix this by making the functions used in qcs404.dtsi to match the contents
> > > of drivers/pinctrl/qcom/pinctrl-qcs404.c.
> > 
> > Right, I cannot find blsp_spi1 which is the only one which is missing,
> > not sure why...
> > 
> > Bjorn do you recall why SPI1 is treated differently...
> 
> Looking at the available pinctrl functions, I believe that blsp_spi1 has
> two possible mux options; identified b y blsp_spi_*_a1 and
> blsp_spi_*_b1.

Yes, so are we good to merge this?

-- 
~Vinod