linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/2] arm64: dts: qcom: pm8450a: add rtc 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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <6F3DC711-88FE-423E-A025-B6AF526B89F2@linaro.org>
Date:   Wed, 14 Dec 2022 00:16:31 +0200
From:   Dmitry Baryshkov <dmitry.baryshkov@...aro.org>
To:     Eric Chanudet <echanude@...hat.com>
CC:     Andy Gross <agross@...nel.org>,
        Bjorn Andersson <andersson@...nel.org>,
        Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
        Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org>,
        Konrad Dybcio <konrad.dybcio@...aro.org>,
        linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Andrew Halaney <ahalaney@...hat.com>,
        Brian Masney <bmasney@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] arm64: dts: qcom: pm8450a: add rtc node



On 13 December 2022 20:18:55 EET, Eric Chanudet <echanude@...hat.com> wrote:
>On Tue, Dec 13, 2022 at 04:18:00AM +0300, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote:
>> >diff --git a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/pm8450a.dtsi b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/pm8450a.dtsi
>> >index 34fc72896761..af761dbfbc66 100644
>> >--- a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/pm8450a.dtsi
>> >+++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/pm8450a.dtsi
>> >@@ -13,6 +13,14 @@ pm8450a: pmic@0 {
>> > 		#address-cells = <1>;
>> > 		#size-cells = <0>;
>> > 
>> >+		rtc@...0 {
>> >+			compatible = "qcom,pm8941-rtc";
>> >+			reg = <0x6000>;
>> >+			reg-names = "rtc", "alarm";
>> >+			interrupts = <0x0 0x61 0x1 IRQ_TYPE_NONE>;
>> 
>> 
>> 0x60?
>
>Checking downstream it uses 0x61 for the ppid. This is also the case
>for all other descriptions of that RTC I could find. On the other hand,
>that does not describe the "alarm" register bank at 0x6100.
>Should it be added, if anything to match reg-names?

Definitely yes. I think otherwise it breaks the idea of reg-names.

>
>I tried a quick test of the alarm on sa8540p-ride:
>$ echo $(date '+%s' -d '+ 10 seconds') > /sys/class/rtc/rtc0/wakealarm
>It logged the interrupt:
>172:          3          0          0          0          0          0          0          0  pmic_arb 101777441 Edge      pm8xxx_rtc_alarm
>

-- 
With best wishes
Dmitry