linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 2/7] drm: ci: Force db410c to host mode

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: <427ceb32-054f-41ff-df95-446b18aa178f@collabora.com>
Date:   Tue, 5 Sep 2023 19:06:43 +0530
From:   Vignesh Raman <vignesh.raman@...labora.com>
To:     Maxime Ripard <mripard@...nel.org>
Cc:     Dmitry Baryshkov <dmitry.baryshkov@...aro.org>,
        dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org, helen.koike@...labora.com,
        guilherme.gallo@...labora.com, sergi.blanch.torne@...labora.com,
        david.heidelberg@...labora.com, daniels@...labora.com,
        gustavo.padovan@...labora.com, emma@...olt.net,
        robclark@...edesktop.org, robdclark@...gle.com, anholt@...gle.com,
        robdclark@...il.com, airlied@...il.com, daniel@...ll.ch,
        jani.nikula@...ux.intel.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-mediatek@...ts.infradead.org,
        virtualization@...ts.linux-foundation.org,
        linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/7] drm: ci: Force db410c to host mode

Hi Maxime,

On 05/09/23 17:27, Maxime Ripard wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 05, 2023 at 05:11:43PM +0530, Vignesh Raman wrote:
>>>> Also, that node actually has a label ("usb"), defined here:
>>>> https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/tree/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/msm8916.dtsi#n2322
>>>>
>>>> So you can end up with
>>>>
>>>> &usb {
>>>>           dr_mode = "host";
>>>> };
>>>
>>> ... which is the simplest and thus more robust one.
>>>
>>
>> Should it be,
>> &{/soc@...sb} {
>> 	dr_mode = "host";
>> };
> 
> No. The &{/...} syntax refers to a path. &... refers to a label. They
> are not equivalent.

Sorry I was not clear before.

With,
&usb {
	dr_mode = "host";
};

The target is <0xffffffff> and fdtoverlay fails to apply the dtbo.

With,
&{/soc@...sb} {
          dr_mode = "host";
};

The target-path is "/soc@...sb" (usb: usb@...9000)

/ {

	fragment@0 {
		target-path = "/soc@...sb";

		__overlay__ {
			dr_mode = "host";
		};
	};
};

So will use  &{/...} syntax in this case.

Regards,
Vignesh