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]

Date:   Sun, 26 Mar 2023 11:08:25 -0500
From:   Alex Elder <elder@...e.org>
To:     Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@...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, konrad.dybcio@...aro.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 3/26/23 11:04 AM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> On 26/03/2023 18:01, Alex Elder wrote:
>> On 3/25/23 6:14 AM, 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.
>>
>> I believe this is the alignment convention used by all IPA nodes
>> in DTS files.  It's possible I'm not seeing something you are,
>> but...  what alignment should be used?  And if I change this,
>> should I change all others?
> 
> If this is aligned, then fine. The diff points it is not, but the diff
> might be a bit tricky sometimes.
> 
> Alignment is till " in previous line. For example sdm845 looks fine.

OK thank you.  I will send v2 of this series after I hear back
from Konrad, adding your reviewed-by, and will double-check
the alignment as well.

					-Alex

> 
> 
> Best regards,
> Krzysztof
>