linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/2] ARM: dts: qcom: sdx65: add IPA information

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: <5f825218-c583-7ccd-6845-684a4b166abe@ieee.org>
Date:   Sun, 26 Mar 2023 11:04:23 -0500
From:   Alex Elder <elder@...e.org>
To:     Konrad Dybcio <konrad.dybcio@...aro.org>,
        Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@...nel.org>,
        Alex Elder <elder@...aro.org>, robh+dt@...nel.org,
        krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org, andersson@...nel.org,
        agross@...nel.org
Cc:     quic_rohiagar@...cinc.com, caleb.connolly@...aro.org,
        mka@...omium.org, evgreen@...omium.org, quic_cpratapa@...cinc.com,
        quic_avuyyuru@...cinc.com, quic_jponduru@...cinc.com,
        quic_subashab@...cinc.com, elder@...nel.org,
        devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] ARM: dts: qcom: sdx65: add IPA information

On 3/25/23 7:12 AM, Konrad Dybcio wrote:
> 
> 
> On 25.03.2023 12:14, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>> On 24/03/2023 21:15, Alex Elder wrote:
>>> Add IPA-related nodes and definitions to "sdx65.dtsi".  The SMP2P
>>> nodes (ipa_smp2p_out and ipa_smp2p_in) are already present.
>>>
>>> Enable IPA in "sdx65-mtp.dts"; this GSI firmware is loaded by Trust
>>> Zone on this platform.
>>>
>>> Tested-by: Rohit Agarwal <quic_rohiagar@...cinc.com>
>>> Signed-off-by: Alex Elder <elder@...aro.org>
>>> ---
>>>   arch/arm/boot/dts/qcom-sdx65-mtp.dts |  5 ++++
>>>   arch/arm/boot/dts/qcom-sdx65.dtsi    | 38 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>>   2 files changed, 43 insertions(+)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/arch/arm/boot/dts/qcom-sdx65-mtp.dts b/arch/arm/boot/dts/qcom-sdx65-mtp.dts
>>> index ed98c83c141fc..72e25de0db5fc 100644
>>> --- a/arch/arm/boot/dts/qcom-sdx65-mtp.dts
>>> +++ b/arch/arm/boot/dts/qcom-sdx65-mtp.dts
>>> @@ -245,6 +245,11 @@ &blsp1_uart3 {
>>>   	status = "okay";
>>>   };
>>>   
>>> +&ipa {
>>> +	qcom,gsi-loader = "skip";
>>> +	status = "okay";
>>> +};
>>> +
>>>   &qpic_bam {
>>>   	status = "okay";
>>>   };
>>> diff --git a/arch/arm/boot/dts/qcom-sdx65.dtsi b/arch/arm/boot/dts/qcom-sdx65.dtsi
>>> index 192f9f94bc8b4..360d6dc144811 100644
>>> --- a/arch/arm/boot/dts/qcom-sdx65.dtsi
>>> +++ b/arch/arm/boot/dts/qcom-sdx65.dtsi
>>> @@ -11,6 +11,7 @@
>>>   #include <dt-bindings/interrupt-controller/arm-gic.h>
>>>   #include <dt-bindings/power/qcom-rpmpd.h>
>>>   #include <dt-bindings/soc/qcom,rpmh-rsc.h>
>>> +#include <dt-bindings/interconnect/qcom,sdx65.h>
>>>   
>>>   / {
>>>   	#address-cells = <1>;
>>> @@ -299,6 +300,43 @@ tcsr_mutex: hwlock@...0000 {
>>>   			#hwlock-cells = <1>;
>>>   		};
>>>   
>>> +		ipa: ipa@...4000 {
>>> +			compatible = "qcom,sdx65-ipa";
>>> +
>>> +			iommus = <&apps_smmu 0x5e0 0x0>,
>>> +				 <&apps_smmu 0x5e2 0x0>;
>>> +			reg = <0x3f40000 0x10000>,
>>> +			      <0x3f50000 0x5000>,
>>> +			      <0x3e04000 0xfc000>;
>>> +			reg-names = "ipa-reg",
>>> +				    "ipa-shared",
>>> +				    "gsi";
>>> +
>>> +			interrupts-extended = <&intc GIC_SPI 241 IRQ_TYPE_EDGE_RISING>,
>>> +					      <&intc GIC_SPI 47 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>,
>>> +					      <&ipa_smp2p_in 0 IRQ_TYPE_EDGE_RISING>,
>>> +					      <&ipa_smp2p_in 1 IRQ_TYPE_EDGE_RISING>;
>>> +			interrupt-names = "ipa",
>>> +					   "gsi",
>>> +					   "ipa-clock-query",
>>> +					   "ipa-setup-ready";
>>
>> These look misaligned.
>>
>> With above:
>>
>> Reviewed-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@...nel.org>
> With this and moving iommus below interconnect:

Is there guidance somewhere that states what order should be
used for these properties?  Why should iommus be below
interconnects?

As I said to Krzysztof, I *think* all of the IPA nodes look
like this; should all of them be updated to follow whatever
the preferred convention is?

Thanks.

					-Alex


> 
> Reviewed-by: Konrad Dybcio <konrad.dybcio@...aro.org>
> 
> Konrad
>>
>>
>> Best regards,
>> Krzysztof
>>