linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/2] dt-bindings: power: qcom,rpmhpd: Add Generic RPMh 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]

Message-ID: <7517b2ca-7d7f-dc0c-7f60-a6281b37ab40@quicinc.com>
Date:   Fri, 21 Jul 2023 18:47:42 +0530
From:   Rohit Agarwal <quic_rohiagar@...cinc.com>
To:     Pavan Kondeti <quic_pkondeti@...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-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org>,
        <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] dt-bindings: power: qcom,rpmhpd: Add Generic RPMh PD
 indexes


On 7/21/2023 11:14 AM, Pavan Kondeti wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 19, 2023 at 10:52:41AM +0530, Rohit Agarwal wrote:
>> Add Generic RPMh Power Domain indexes that can be used
>> for all the Qualcomm SoC henceforth.
>> The power domain indexes of these bindings are based on compatibility
>> with current targets like SM8[2345]50 targets.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Rohit Agarwal <quic_rohiagar@...cinc.com>
>> Suggested-by: Konrad Dybcio <konrad.dybcio@...aro.org>
>> ---
>>   include/dt-bindings/power/qcom,rpmhpd.h | 30 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>   1 file changed, 30 insertions(+)
>>   create mode 100644 include/dt-bindings/power/qcom,rpmhpd.h
>>
>> diff --git a/include/dt-bindings/power/qcom,rpmhpd.h b/include/dt-bindings/power/qcom,rpmhpd.h
>> new file mode 100644
>> index 0000000..7c201a6
>> --- /dev/null
>> +++ b/include/dt-bindings/power/qcom,rpmhpd.h
>> @@ -0,0 +1,30 @@
>> +/* SPDX-License-Identifier: (GPL-2.0-only OR BSD-2-Clause) */
>> +/*
>> + * Copyright (c) 2023, Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. All rights reserved.
>> + */
>> +
>> +#ifndef _DT_BINDINGS_POWER_QCOM_RPMHPD_H
>> +#define _DT_BINDINGS_POWER_QCOM_RPMHPD_H
>> +
>> +/* Generic RPMH Power Domain Indexes */
>> +#define RPMHPD_CX               0
>> +#define RPMHPD_CX_AO		1
>> +#define RPMHPD_EBI		2
>> +#define RPMHPD_GFX		3
>> +#define RPMHPD_LCX		4
>> +#define RPMHPD_LMX		5
>> +#define RPMHPD_MMCX		6
>> +#define RPMHPD_MMCX_AO		7
>> +#define RPMHPD_MX		8
>> +#define RPMHPD_MX_AO		9
>> +#define RPMHPD_MXC		10
>> +#define RPMHPD_MXC_AO		11
>> +#define RPMHPD_MSS              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
>> +
>> +#endif
>> -- 
> I see the PD performance levels (RPMH_REGULATOR_LEVEL_xxx) are still
> coming from qcom-rpmpd.h. Which means Socs with RPMh also need to
> include the older header for these definitions along with this newly
> created header. something to improve for the clarity sake?
Agreed. I think we can move these to the new header so that the new SoC 
with RPMH can completely
move to rpmhpd.h.
Ok. Will wait for anymore suggestions before updating this version.

Thanks,
Rohit.
>
> Thanks,
> Pavan