linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 04/13] arm64: dts: ti: k3-am65: Enable OSPI nodes at the board level

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: <bb87effc-00c3-7d97-08c9-68408f9c514c@ti.com>
Date:   Mon, 7 Aug 2023 11:46:54 +0530
From:   Dhruva Gole <d-gole@...com>
To:     Andrew Davis <afd@...com>, Nishanth Menon <nm@...com>,
        Vignesh Raghavendra <vigneshr@...com>,
        Tero Kristo <kristo@...nel.org>,
        Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
        Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org>,
        Conor Dooley <conor+dt@...nel.org>,
        <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>
CC:     <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 04/13] arm64: dts: ti: k3-am65: Enable OSPI nodes at the
 board level

Hi Andrew,

On 03/08/23 02:23, Andrew Davis wrote:
> OSPI nodes defined in the top-level AM65x SoC dtsi files are incomplete
> and may not be functional unless they are extended with pinmux and
> device information.
> 
> As the attached OSPI device is only known about at the board integration
> level, these nodes should only be enabled when provided with this
> information.
> 
> Disable the OSPI nodes in the dtsi files and only enable the ones that
> are actually pinned out on a given board.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Andrew Davis <afd@...com>
> ---
>   arch/arm64/boot/dts/ti/k3-am65-iot2050-common.dtsi | 1 +
>   arch/arm64/boot/dts/ti/k3-am65-mcu.dtsi            | 2 ++
>   arch/arm64/boot/dts/ti/k3-am654-base-board.dts     | 1 +
>   3 files changed, 4 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/ti/k3-am65-iot2050-common.dtsi b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/ti/k3-am65-iot2050-common.dtsi
> index e26bd988e5224..6041862d5aa75 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/ti/k3-am65-iot2050-common.dtsi
> +++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/ti/k3-am65-iot2050-common.dtsi
> @@ -593,6 +593,7 @@ adc {
>   };
>   
>   &ospi0 {
> +	status = "okay";

Ok, so this k3-am65-iot2050 series of DT files seem to be structured in
a bit different manner than our SKs and EVMs?

The terminologies like advanced, advanced-m2, basic, etc. are a little
confusing to me. However, I am wondering if we don't do any status = ..
here, and rather make ospi status okays from the iot2050 dts files?

Pardon me if I am making an invalid suggestion, I don't have much
background on these boards.

>   	pinctrl-names = "default";
>   	pinctrl-0 = <&mcu_fss0_ospi0_pins_default>;
>   
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/ti/k3-am65-mcu.dtsi b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/ti/k3-am65-mcu.dtsi
> index 7b1f94a89eca8..2c9c20a9d9179 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/ti/k3-am65-mcu.dtsi
> +++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/ti/k3-am65-mcu.dtsi
> @@ -295,6 +295,7 @@ ospi0: spi@...40000 {
>   			power-domains = <&k3_pds 248 TI_SCI_PD_EXCLUSIVE>;
>   			#address-cells = <1>;
>   			#size-cells = <0>;
> +			status = "disabled";
>   		};
>   
>   		ospi1: spi@...50000 {
> @@ -309,6 +310,7 @@ ospi1: spi@...50000 {
>   			power-domains = <&k3_pds 249 TI_SCI_PD_EXCLUSIVE>;
>   			#address-cells = <1>;
>   			#size-cells = <0>;
> +			status = "disabled";
>   		};
>   	};
>   
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/ti/k3-am654-base-board.dts b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/ti/k3-am654-base-board.dts
> index 973a89b04a22f..43de7c132d343 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/ti/k3-am654-base-board.dts
> +++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/ti/k3-am654-base-board.dts
> @@ -530,6 +530,7 @@ &mcu_r5fss0_core1 {
>   };
>   
>   &ospi0 {
> +	status = "okay";
>   	pinctrl-names = "default";
>   	pinctrl-0 = <&mcu_fss0_ospi0_pins_default>;
>   

-- 
Thanks and Regards,
Dhruva Gole