linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH RFT v2 00/14] SMD RPMCC sleep preparations

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, 20 Apr 2023 12:04:23 +0200
From:   Stephan Gerhold <stephan@...hold.net>
To:     Konrad Dybcio <konrad.dybcio@...aro.org>
Cc:     Andy Gross <agross@...nel.org>,
        Bjorn Andersson <andersson@...nel.org>,
        Michael Turquette <mturquette@...libre.com>,
        Stephen Boyd <sboyd@...nel.org>,
        Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
        Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org>,
        linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org, linux-clk@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@...aro.org>,
        devicetree@...r.kernel.org, Shawn Guo <shawn.guo@...aro.org>,
        Taniya Das <quic_tdas@...cinc.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFT v2 00/14] SMD RPMCC sleep preparations

On Thu, Apr 20, 2023 at 11:36:24AM +0200, Konrad Dybcio wrote:
> On 20.04.2023 09:56, Stephan Gerhold wrote:
> > On Thu, Apr 20, 2023 at 03:50:16AM +0200, Konrad Dybcio wrote:
> >> On 8.03.2023 22:35, Konrad Dybcio wrote:
> >>> Keepalive clocks for other platforms were gathered by digging in old
> >>> downstream kernels, please give them a test.
> >> I have an implementation of rpmcc-within-icc ready(ish) locally. Turns out
> >> some SoCs need a keepalive (19.2MHz, active-only) vote on clocks that
> >> are NOT governed by interconnect.. So before we can disable clocks,
> >> both will need to be implemented.. ugh... I was hoping we could avoid
> >> having it in rpmcc..
> > Can you give an example? Which clocks are affected on which SoC?
> msm8998/sdm660 and PNoC

I don't see a PNoC for 8998/660, do you mean the "cnoc_periph_clk"
downstream? Like the other NoCs it seems to be a RPM_BUS_CLK_TYPE, which
means it does fit best into interconnect in my opinion. From a quick
grep I don't see any usage of it in msm-4.4 downstream other than the
active-only keepalive vote. So maybe you could just send that vote once
in icc_rpm_smd and then ignore that clock (don't expose it at all)?

Thanks,
Stephan