linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/3] dt-bindings: power: rpmpd: Add Generic RPM(h) PD indexes

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, 6 Jul 2023 20:00:42 +0530
From:   Pavan Kondeti <quic_pkondeti@...cinc.com>
To:     Rohit Agarwal <quic_rohiagar@...cinc.com>
CC:     <agross@...nel.org>, <andersson@...nel.org>,
        <konrad.dybcio@...aro.org>, <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
        <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org>, <conor+dt@...nel.org>,
        <linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org>, <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
        <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] dt-bindings: power: rpmpd: Add Generic RPM(h) PD
 indexes

On Thu, Jul 06, 2023 at 06:19:51PM +0530, Rohit Agarwal wrote:
> Add Generic RPM(h) Power Domain indexes that can be used
> for all the Qualcomm SoC henceforth.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Rohit Agarwal <quic_rohiagar@...cinc.com>
> Suggested-by: Konrad Dybcio <konrad.dybcio@...aro.org>

Does it make sense to give this link [1] so that we know what is
Konrad's suggestion and the discussion around it?

[1]
https://lore.kernel.org/all/0d468d08-6410-e424-b4f3-5245cdb0334a@linaro.org/
> ---
>  include/dt-bindings/power/qcom-rpmpd.h | 49 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>  1 file changed, 49 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/include/dt-bindings/power/qcom-rpmpd.h b/include/dt-bindings/power/qcom-rpmpd.h
> index 83be996..6498251 100644
> --- a/include/dt-bindings/power/qcom-rpmpd.h
> +++ b/include/dt-bindings/power/qcom-rpmpd.h
> @@ -4,6 +4,55 @@
>  #ifndef _DT_BINDINGS_POWER_QCOM_RPMPD_H
>  #define _DT_BINDINGS_POWER_QCOM_RPMPD_H
>  
> +/* Generic RPMH Power Domain Indexes */
> +#define RPMHPD_CX		0
> +#define RPMHPD_MX		1
> +#define RPMHPD_CX_AO		2
> +#define RPMHPD_MX_AO		3
> +#define RPMHPD_GFX		4
> +#define RPMHPD_MSS		5
> +#define RPMHPD_EBI		6
> +#define RPMHPD_LCX		7
> +#define RPMHPD_LMX		8
> +#define RPMHPD_MMCX		9
> +#define RPMHPD_MMCX_AO		10
> +#define RPMHPD_MXC		11
> +#define RPMHPD_MXC_AO		12
> +#define RPMHPD_NSP		13
> +#define RPMHPD_NSP0		14
> +#define RPMHPD_NSP1		15
> +#define RPMHPD_QPHY		16
> +#define RPMHPD_DDR		17
> +#define RPMHPD_XO		18
> +
> +/* Generic RPM Power Domain Indexes */
> +#define RPMPD_VDDCX		0
> +#define RPMPD_VDDCX_AO		1
> +#define RPMPD_VDDMX		2
> +#define RPMPD_VDDMX_AO		3
> +#define RPMPD_VDDCX_VFL		4
> +#define RPMPD_VDDMX_VFL		5
> +#define RPMPD_VDDCX_VFC		6
> +#define RPMPD_LPI_CX		7
> +#define RPMPD_LPI_MX		8
> +#define RPMPD_SSCCX		9
> +#define RPMPD_SSCCX_VFL		10
> +#define RPMPD_SSCMX		11
> +#define RPMPD_SSCMX_VFL		12
> +#define RPMPD_VDDSSCX		13
> +#define RPMPD_VDDSSCX_VFC	14
> +#define RPMPD_VDDGFX		15
> +#define RPMPD_VDDGFX_VFC	16
> +#define RPMPD_VDDGX		17
> +#define RPMPD_VDDGX_AO		18
> +#define RPMPD_VDDMDCX		19
> +#define RPMPD_VDDMDCX_AO	20
> +#define RPMPD_VDDMDCX_VFC	21
> +#define RPMPD_VDDMD		22
> +#define RPMPD_VDDMD_AO		23
> +#define RPMPD_LPICX_VFL		24
> +#define RPMPD_LPIMX_VFL		25
> +

How did you come up with this list? A union of all SoCs supported by
RPMh driver?

>  /* SA8775P Power Domain Indexes */
>  #define SA8775P_CX	0
>  #define SA8775P_CX_AO	1
> -- 
> 2.7.4
> 

Thanks,
Pavan