[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <Y4jslJfTVtQ9cIGm@spud>
Date: Thu, 1 Dec 2022 18:04:04 +0000
From: Conor Dooley <conor@...nel.org>
To: JiaJie Ho <jiajie.ho@...rfivetech.com>
Cc: "Conor.Dooley@...rochip.com" <Conor.Dooley@...rochip.com>,
"robh+dt@...nel.org" <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
"herbert@...dor.apana.org.au" <herbert@...dor.apana.org.au>,
"linux-crypto@...r.kernel.org" <linux-crypto@...r.kernel.org>,
"kernel@...il.dk" <kernel@...il.dk>,
"davem@...emloft.net" <davem@...emloft.net>,
"devicetree@...r.kernel.org" <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-riscv@...ts.infradead.org" <linux-riscv@...ts.infradead.org>,
"krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org"
<krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 6/6] riscv: dts: starfive: Add crypto and DMA node for
VisionFive 2
On Thu, Dec 01, 2022 at 06:17:26AM +0000, JiaJie Ho wrote:
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Conor.Dooley@...rochip.com <Conor.Dooley@...rochip.com>
> > Hey Jia Jie Ho,
> >
> > On 30/11/2022 05:52, Jia Jie Ho wrote:
> > > [You don't often get email from jiajie.ho@...rfivetech.com. Learn why
> > > this is important at https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderIdentification ]
> > >
> > > EXTERNAL EMAIL: Do not click links or open attachments unless you know
> > > the content is safe
> > >
> > > Adding StarFive crypto IP and DMA controller node to VisionFive 2 SoC.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Jia Jie Ho <jiajie.ho@...rfivetech.com>
> > > Signed-off-by: Huan Feng <huan.feng@...rfivetech.com>
> >
> > Out of curiosity, what was Huan Feng's contribution to this patch?
> > Did they co-develop it, or is there some other reason?
> >
> Hi Conor,
> Yes, Huan Feng co-developed this driver.
In that case, the SoB block should look like:
Co-developed-by: Huan Feng <huan.feng@...rfivetech.com>
Signed-off-by: Huan Feng <huan.feng@...rfivetech.com>
Signed-off-by: Jia Jie Ho <jiajie.ho@...rfivetech.com>
Similarly for any other patches they may have co-developed :)
> > >
> > > diff --git
> > > a/arch/riscv/boot/dts/starfive/jh7110-starfive-visionfive-v2.dts
> > > b/arch/riscv/boot/dts/starfive/jh7110-starfive-visionfive-v2.dts
> > > index 450e920236a5..da2aa4d597f3 100644
> > > --- a/arch/riscv/boot/dts/starfive/jh7110-starfive-visionfive-v2.dts
> > > +++ b/arch/riscv/boot/dts/starfive/jh7110-starfive-visionfive-v2.dts
> > > @@ -115,3 +115,11 @@ &tdm_ext {
> > > &mclk_ext {
> > > clock-frequency = <49152000>;
> > > };
> > > +
> > > +&sec_dma {
> > > + status = "okay";
> > > +};
> > > +
> > > +&crypto {
> > > + status = "okay";
> > > +};
> >
> > In what scenario would you not want to have these enabled?
> These drivers are always enabled.
> Is everything ok with the dts node entries?
If the hardware is always present, why not drop the "disabled" in
jh7110.dtsi & these two entries marking them as "okay" in the .dts?
> > > diff --git a/arch/riscv/boot/dts/starfive/jh7110.dtsi
> > > b/arch/riscv/boot/dts/starfive/jh7110.dtsi
> > > index 4ac159d79d66..745a5650882c 100644
> > > --- a/arch/riscv/boot/dts/starfive/jh7110.dtsi
> > > +++ b/arch/riscv/boot/dts/starfive/jh7110.dtsi
> > > @@ -455,5 +455,41 @@ uart5: serial@...20000 {
> > > reg-shift = <2>;
> > > status = "disabled";
> > > };
> > > +
> > > + sec_dma: sec_dma@...08000 {
> > > + status = "disabled";
> > > + };
> > > +
> > > + crypto: crypto@...00000 {
> > > + status = "disabled";
> > > + };
> > > };
> > > };
Thanks,
Conor.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists