linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v4 0/6] Add MSM8939 SoC support with two devices

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: <254ce21e-5c19-0c29-acc4-9758bdca83b6@linaro.org>
Date:   Mon, 23 Jan 2023 16:14:22 +0000
From:   Bryan O'Donoghue <bryan.odonoghue@...aro.org>
To:     Stephan Gerhold <stephan@...hold.net>
Cc:     agross@...nel.org, andersson@...nel.org, konrad.dybcio@...aro.org,
        djakov@...nel.org, robh+dt@...nel.org,
        krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org, linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-pm@...r.kernel.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, benl@...areup.com,
        shawn.guo@...aro.org, fabien.parent@...aro.org, leo.yan@...aro.org,
        dmitry.baryshkov@...aro.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 0/6] Add MSM8939 SoC support with two devices

On 23/01/2023 14:00, Stephan Gerhold wrote:
> Unless this conclusion changes with your CPR patch set this means that
> both the DTS and the DT schema will need changes anyway, because you
> wouldn't need power-domain-names = "cpr", but rather
> 
> 	power-domains = <&rpmpd MSM8939_VDDMX_AO>, <&vreg_dummy>;
> 	power-domain-names = "mx", "cpr";

I have not been owning the CPR for 8939 so far but, this what we have in 
our 4.19 tree.

CPU0: cpu@100 {
         device_type = "cpu";
         compatible = "arm,cortex-a53", "arm,armv8";
         reg = <0x100>;
         next-level-cache = <&L2_1>;
         enable-method = "qcom,kpss-acc-v2";
         qcom,acc = <&acc0>;
         qcom,saw = <&saw0>;
         clocks = <&apcs1>;
         operating-points-v2 = <&cluster1_opp_table>;
         power-domains = <&cpr>;
         power-domain-names = "cpr";
         #cooling-cells = <2>;
         capacity-dmips-mhz = <1024>;
};

cpr: power-controller@...8000 {
         compatible = "qcom,msm8939-cpr", "qcom,cpr";
         reg = <0x0b018000 0x1000>;
         interrupts = <0 15 IRQ_TYPE_EDGE_RISING>;
         clocks = <&rpmcc CXO_SMD_CXO_A_CLK>;
         clock-names = "ref";
         power-domains = <&rpmpd MSM8939_VDDMX_AO>;
         #power-domain-cells = <0>;
         operating-points-v2 = <&cpr_opp_table>;
};

So the CPR code not the CPU code owns VDDMX_AO. I'm not sure if there's 
a good reason why it has been done that way.

Anyway, this feels like a bit of a departure from our core discussion. I 
will see if it is possible to drop the CPU power-domain entirely 
contingent on the patch you flagged.

---
bod