linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2] soc/tegra: fuse: use platform info with soc revision

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <44a040d5-529e-e4d6-4745-15a6d59a04f2@nvidia.com>
Date:   Wed, 9 Nov 2022 10:53:45 +0000
From:   Jon Hunter <jonathanh@...dia.com>
To:     Kartik <kkartik@...dia.com>, thierry.reding@...il.com,
        digetx@...il.com, ndesaulniers@...gle.com, ulf.hansson@...aro.org,
        arnd@...db.de, skamble@...dia.com, windhl@....com,
        sumitg@...dia.com, linux-tegra@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] soc/tegra: fuse: use platform info with soc revision


On 09/11/2022 10:51, Jon Hunter wrote:
> 
> 
> On 09/11/2022 06:26, Kartik wrote:
>> Tegra pre-silicon platforms do not have chip revisions. This makes the
>> revision soc attribute meaningless on these platforms.
>>
>> Instead, populate the revision soc attribute with
>> "platform name + chip revision" for Silicon. For pre-silicon platforms
>> populate it with "platform name" instead.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Kartik <kkartik@...dia.com>
>> ---
>> v1->v2:
>>   * Updated commit message.
>>
>>   drivers/soc/tegra/fuse/fuse-tegra.c    | 23 +++++++++++++++++++++--
>>   drivers/soc/tegra/fuse/tegra-apbmisc.c |  1 +
>>   include/soc/tegra/fuse.h               | 15 +++++++++++++++
>>   3 files changed, 37 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/soc/tegra/fuse/fuse-tegra.c 
>> b/drivers/soc/tegra/fuse/fuse-tegra.c
>> index ea25a1dcafc2..a20c9e0105dc 100644
>> --- a/drivers/soc/tegra/fuse/fuse-tegra.c
>> +++ b/drivers/soc/tegra/fuse/fuse-tegra.c
>> @@ -35,6 +35,19 @@ static const char 
>> *tegra_revision_name[TEGRA_REVISION_MAX] = {
>>       [TEGRA_REVISION_A04]     = "A04",
>>   };
>> +static const char *tegra_platform_name[TEGRA_PLATFORM_MAX] = {
>> +    [TEGRA_PLATFORM_SILICON]            = "Silicon",
>> +    [TEGRA_PLATFORM_QT]                = "QT",
>> +    [TEGRA_PLATFORM_SYSTEM_FPGA]            = "System FPGA",
>> +    [TEGRA_PLATFORM_UNIT_FPGA]            = "Unit FPGA",
>> +    [TEGRA_PLATFORM_ASIM_QT]            = "Asim QT",
>> +    [TEGRA_PLATFORM_ASIM_LINSIM]            = "Asim Linsim",
>> +    [TEGRA_PLATFORM_DSIM_ASIM_LINSIM]        = "Dsim Asim Linsim",
>> +    [TEGRA_PLATFORM_VERIFICATION_SIMULATION]    = "Verification 
>> Simulation",
>> +    [TEGRA_PLATFORM_VDK]                = "VDK",
>> +    [TEGRA_PLATFORM_VSP]                = "VSP",
>> +};
>> +
>>   static const struct of_device_id car_match[] __initconst = {
>>       { .compatible = "nvidia,tegra20-car", },
>>       { .compatible = "nvidia,tegra30-car", },
>> @@ -370,8 +383,14 @@ struct device * __init 
>> tegra_soc_device_register(void)
>>           return NULL;
>>       attr->family = kasprintf(GFP_KERNEL, "Tegra");
>> -    attr->revision = kasprintf(GFP_KERNEL, "%s",
>> -        tegra_revision_name[tegra_sku_info.revision]);
>> +    if (tegra_is_silicon()) {
> 
> curly braces are not needed.
> 
>> +        attr->revision = kasprintf(GFP_KERNEL, "%s %s",
>> +                       tegra_platform_name[tegra_sku_info.platform],
> 
> Do we need to include platform here? Can't we just print the revision?

Actually, printing something like "Silicon A02" here is fine. No need to 
change.

Jon

-- 
nvpublic