linux-kernel - RE: [EXT] Re: [PATCH 1/2 v7] dt-bindings: watchdog: marvell GTI system watchdog driver

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:   Tue, 16 May 2023 11:24:36 +0000
From:   Sunil Kovvuri Goutham <sgoutham@...vell.com>
To:     Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@...aro.org>,
        Bharat Bhushan <bbhushan2@...vell.com>,
        "wim@...ux-watchdog.org" <wim@...ux-watchdog.org>,
        "linux@...ck-us.net" <linux@...ck-us.net>,
        "robh+dt@...nel.org" <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
        "krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org" 
        <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org>,
        "linux-watchdog@...r.kernel.org" <linux-watchdog@...r.kernel.org>,
        "devicetree@...r.kernel.org" <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: RE: [EXT] Re: [PATCH 1/2 v7] dt-bindings: watchdog: marvell GTI
 system watchdog driver



> -----Original Message-----
> From: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@...aro.org>
> Sent: Tuesday, May 16, 2023 3:55 PM
> To: Sunil Kovvuri Goutham <sgoutham@...vell.com>; Bharat Bhushan
> <bbhushan2@...vell.com>; wim@...ux-watchdog.org; linux@...ck-us.net;
> robh+dt@...nel.org; krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org; linux-
> watchdog@...r.kernel.org; devicetree@...r.kernel.org; linux-
> kernel@...r.kernel.org
> Subject: Re: [EXT] Re: [PATCH 1/2 v7] dt-bindings: watchdog: marvell GTI system
> watchdog driver
> 
> On 16/05/2023 12:06, Sunil Kovvuri Goutham wrote:
> 
> 
> >>>>> Marvell have octeontx2 series of processor which have watchdog timer.
> >>>>> In 95xx,98xx,96xx are the processors in octeontx2 series of
> >>>>> processor. So
> >>>> octeontx2-95xx is on soc, octeontx2-96xx is another and so on.
> >>>>
> >>>> No, 95xx is not a processor. Otherwise please point me to exact
> >>>> product datasheet. Hint: I checked it.
> >>>
> >>> Looks like 95xx data sheet is not public, will remove in that case.
> >>
> >> We can talk about 96xx. Can you point me to the SoC named exactly like this?
> >> Hint: I checked it.
> >
> > To recap what Bharat mentioned before along with references to individual
> processors.
> > OcteonTx2 is a family of processors
> > https://www.marvell.com/products/data-processing-units.html
> > Please check for "OCTEON TX2 DPUs"
> > CN96xx and CN98xx are two silicon variants in this family.
> > https://www.marvell.com/content/dam/marvell/en/public-collateral/embed
> > ded-processors/marvell-infrastructure-processors-octeon-tx2-cn92xx-cn9
> > 6xx-cn98xx-product-brief-2020-02.pdf
> 
> This is a product brief which further suggests CN96xx is a family (or sub-family).
> 
> "xx" is pretty often used as family, not as product. Otherwise how one product
> CN92XX can come with 12-18 cores *in the same time*?

"xx" here suggests skews, some 92xx may have 18 cores and some may have
few cores fused out resulting in 12cores.

> 
> https://www.marvell.com/company/newsroom/marvell-announces-octeon-
> tx2-family-of-multi-core-infrastructure-processors.html
> "Marvell’s CN91xx, CN92xx, CN96xx, and CN98xx processor families include:"
> 
> https://www.marvell.com/products/data-processing-units.html
> 
> 
> > And CNF95xx is another silicon variant in the same family.
> > https://www.marvell.com/content/dam/marvell/en/public-collateral/embed
> > ded-processors/marvell-infrastructure-processors-octeon-fusion-cnf95xx
> > -product-brief.pdf
> 
> Again, unspecific product brief. Your other briefs specify them clearer, e.g.
> CN9130, CN9131

Not sure what you are looking for in the product brief, I pointed to the link just to show proof
of 95xx being an official product.

> 
> >
> > Since the HW block is same in all the variants of silicons in this
> > family, we would like to use a generic string instead of different
> > compatible string for each one. ie
> > - const: marvell,octeontx2-wdt
> > Hope this is okay.
> 
> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-
> 3A__elixir.bootlin.com_linux_v6.1-
> 2Drc1_source_Documentation_devicetree_bindings_writing-2Dbindings.rst-
> 23L42&d=DwIDaQ&c=nKjWec2b6R0mOyPaz7xtfQ&r=q3VKxXQKiboRw_F01ggTz
> HuhwawxR1P9_tMCN2FODU4&m=GGfz5QI8ldHRqao5OsrfuHZQso5LLNBeBxCZr
> Ai7Zow-
> qoKl_S1Yw90OWnSZ3FFx&s=kM0VFY1b15BYvp2EUapQjZ6Eb96aZ_yAE76EKCmA
> aEQ&e=
> 
> >
> > Same with CN10K or Octeon10 family of silicons.
> > https://www.marvell.com/products/data-processing-units.html
> > Please check for "OCTEON 10"
> >
> > CN103xx and CN106xx are two silicons in this family.
> 
> Are they? "Up to 8" cores, so how this can be one specific silicon? One customer
> buys CN10300 with 8 cores, second buys exactly the same CN10300 and has 4
> cores?
> 
> You are mixing families and specific devices.

I was making it simple to understand.

OcteonTx2 and Octeon10 (CN10K) are two generations of Octeon processors from Marvell.
Within each generation there are multiple silicon variants.
Again for each variant there are multiple skews.

Since the watchdog hardware block functionality is same across all of above
generations / variants / families / skews, is it okay to use below compatible strings ?

- const: marvell,octeontx2-wdt
- const: marvell,cn10k-wdt

Also this is the same naming we have been using in other drivers as well.
drivers/net/ethernet/marvell/octeontx2
drivers/net/ethernet/marvell/octeontx2/af/rvu_cn10k.c

drivers/perf/marvell_cn10k_ddr_pmu.c
static const struct of_device_id cn10k_ddr_pmu_of_match[] = {
        { .compatible = "marvell,cn10k-ddr-pmu", },
        { },
};

Thanks,
Sunil.