linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] arm64: dts: qcom: sm6115: Add interconnect nodes

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]

Date:   Thu, 19 Jan 2023 15:06:27 +0200
From:   Dmitry Baryshkov <dmitry.baryshkov@...aro.org>
To:     Bhupesh Sharma <bhupesh.sharma@...aro.org>,
        linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org
Cc:     devicetree@...r.kernel.org, agross@...nel.org,
        bhupesh.linux@...il.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        robh+dt@...nel.org, krzysztof.kozlowski@...aro.org,
        konrad.dybcio@...aro.org, a39.skl@...il.com, andersson@...nel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] arm64: dts: qcom: sm6115: Add interconnect nodes

On 30/11/2022 12:45, Bhupesh Sharma wrote:
> Add the interconnect nodes inside SM6115 dtsi.
> 
> Cc: Bjorn Andersson <andersson@...nel.org>
> Cc: Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>
> Signed-off-by: Bhupesh Sharma <bhupesh.sharma@...aro.org>
> ---
> - Based on linux-next/master
> - Depends on the SM6115 dt-binding and driver patchset, which can be
>    seen here: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-arm-msm/20221130103841.2266464-1-bhupesh.sharma@linaro.org/
> 
>   arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sm6115.dtsi | 51 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>   1 file changed, 51 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sm6115.dtsi b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sm6115.dtsi
> index e4a2440ce544..dad5ab3edf0e 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sm6115.dtsi
> +++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sm6115.dtsi
> @@ -485,6 +485,57 @@ usb_1_hsphy: phy@...3000 {
>   			status = "disabled";
>   		};
>   
> +		snoc: interconnect@...0000 {
> +			compatible = "qcom,sm6115-snoc";
> +			reg = <0x01880000 0x60200>;
> +			#interconnect-cells = <1>;

Should we use 2 here as we do now for most of interconnect drivers?

> +			clock-names = "bus", "bus_a";
> +			clocks = <&rpmcc RPM_SMD_SNOC_CLK>,
> +				 <&rpmcc RPM_SMD_SNOC_A_CLK>;

-- 
With best wishes
Dmitry