linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/3] arm64: dts: ti: k3-am65-main: drop RNG clock

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: <20221102151706.krsi5lujydb4nswa@daybreak>
Date:   Wed, 2 Nov 2022 10:17:06 -0500
From:   Nishanth Menon <nm@...com>
To:     Jayesh Choudhary <j-choudhary@...com>
CC:     <vigneshr@...com>, <kristo@...nel.org>, <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
        <afd@...com>, <j-keerthy@...com>,
        <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org>, <s-anna@...com>,
        <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
        <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] arm64: dts: ti: k3-am65-main: drop RNG clock

On 03:02-20221101, Jayesh Choudhary wrote:
> Drop RNG clock property as it is not controlled by rng-driver.

Does'nt tell me what is the alternative? why is the hardware description
not sufficient for control?

https://software-dl.ti.com/tisci/esd/latest/5_soc_doc/am65x_sr2/clocks.html#clocks-for-sa2-ul0-device
Looks like a perfectly valid description - do we have a bug and firmware
does'nt allow control here?

> 
> Fixes: b366b2409c97 ("arm64: dts: ti: k3-am6: Add crypto accelarator node")
> Signed-off-by: Jayesh Choudhary <j-choudhary@...com>
> ---
>  arch/arm64/boot/dts/ti/k3-am65-main.dtsi | 1 -
>  1 file changed, 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/ti/k3-am65-main.dtsi b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/ti/k3-am65-main.dtsi
> index 4005a73cfea9..e166d7b7e3a1 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/ti/k3-am65-main.dtsi
> +++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/ti/k3-am65-main.dtsi
> @@ -126,7 +126,6 @@ rng: rng@...0000 {
>  			compatible = "inside-secure,safexcel-eip76";
>  			reg = <0x0 0x4e10000 0x0 0x7d>;
>  			interrupts = <GIC_SPI 24 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>;
> -			clocks = <&k3_clks 136 1>;

Does this mean that the crypto module's power-domains property should be
dropped as well?

>  			status = "disabled"; /* Used by OP-TEE */
>  		};
>  	};
> -- 
> 2.25.1
> 

-- 
Regards,
Nishanth Menon
Key (0xDDB5849D1736249D) / Fingerprint: F8A2 8693 54EB 8232 17A3  1A34 DDB5 849D 1736 249D