linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH V2 01/13] dt-bindings: remoteproc: qcom: Add support for multipd model

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, 6 Jun 2023 08:14:33 +0200
From:   Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@...aro.org>
To:     Manikanta Mylavarapu <quic_mmanikan@...cinc.com>,
        agross@...nel.org, andersson@...nel.org, konrad.dybcio@...aro.org,
        robh+dt@...nel.org, krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org,
        conor+dt@...nel.org, jassisinghbrar@...il.com,
        mathieu.poirier@...aro.org, mturquette@...libre.com,
        sboyd@...nel.org, quic_eberman@...cinc.com, quic_mojha@...cinc.com,
        kvalo@...nel.org, loic.poulain@...aro.org,
        linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-remoteproc@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-clk@...r.kernel.org
Cc:     quic_srichara@...cinc.com, quic_sjaganat@...cinc.com,
        quic_kathirav@...cinc.com, quic_anusha@...cinc.com,
        quic_poovendh@...cinc.com, quic_varada@...cinc.com,
        quic_devipriy@...cinc.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH V2 01/13] dt-bindings: remoteproc: qcom: Add support for
 multipd model

On 05/06/2023 14:02, Manikanta Mylavarapu wrote:
>>> +  memory-region:
>>> +    items:
>>> +      - description: Q6 pd reserved region
>>> +
>>> +  glink-edge:
>>> +    $ref: /schemas/remoteproc/qcom,glink-edge.yaml#
>>> +    description:
>>> +      Qualcomm G-Link subnode which represents communication edge, channels
>>> +      and devices related to the Modem.
>>> +
>>> +patternProperties:
>>> +  "^pd-1|pd-2|pd-3":
>>> +    type: object
>>> +    description:
>>> +      In Multipd model, WCSS pd depends on Q6 pd i.e Q6 pd should be up before
>>> +      WCSS. It can be achieved by keeping wcss pd node as subnode of Q6
>>> +      device node.
>>
>> That's not enough. Your description does not say what is this, why you
>> have two protection domains for same compatible. What's more, it a bit
>> deviates from hardware description.
>>
> WCSS means 'wireless connectivity sub system', in simple words it's a
> wifi radio block.
> 
> IPQ5018 SOC has both internal (AHB) wifi radio/WCSS and external (PCIE)
> wifi radio/WCSS. In Q6, Root protection domain will provide services to
> both internal (AHB) and external (PCIE) wifi radio's protection domain.
> So we have two protection domains for IPQ5018, one is for internal(AHB) 
> and other is for external(PCIE) wifi radio.

So it is now in email, but not in the code...
> 
>>> +
>>> +    properties:
>>> +      compatible:
>>> +        enum:
>>> +          - qcom,ipq5018-wcss-ahb-mpd
>>> +          - qcom,ipq9574-wcss-ahb-mpd
>>> +          - qcom,ipq5018-wcss-pcie-mpd
>>
>> Keep rather alphabetical order (so both 5018 together).
>>
>> I also do not understand these at all. Why adding bus type to
>> compatible? This rarely is allowed (unless it is PCIe controller within
>> soc).
>>
> IPQ5018 SOC has in-built PCIE controller. Here QDSP6 will bring up
> external(PCIE) and internal (AHB) wifi radio's. To separate AHB, PCIE 
> radio's properties, i have added bus type to compatible.

It's the same device - WCSS - right? We do not create multiple nodes and
compatibles for the same devices. Bus suffixes are almost never parts of
compatibles.


>>
>> Drop.
>>
>>> +
>>> +unevaluatedProperties: false
>>
>> This changed... why?
>>
>>
> 'unevaluatedProperties' is similar to 'additionalProperties' except
> that it recognize properties declared in subschemas as well.

You don't have to explain me what are unevaluatedProperties or
additionalProperties. Let's assume that I know them. What you should
explain is why you changed it. Where is the reference to other schema?


Best regards,
Krzysztof