linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v4 3/3] remoteproc: zynqmp: get TCM from device-tree

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: <dc5d4145-770f-3318-b026-5ce29483d384@linaro.org>
Date:   Wed, 6 Sep 2023 08:20:19 +0200
From:   Philippe Mathieu-Daudé <philmd@...aro.org>
To:     Tanmay Shah <tanmay.shah@....com>,
        linux-remoteproc@...r.kernel.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Bjorn Andersson <andersson@...nel.org>,
        Mathieu Poirier <mathieu.poirier@...aro.org>,
        Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
        Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org>,
        Michal Simek <michal.simek@....com>
Cc:     Conor Dooley <conor+dt@...nel.org>,
        Radhey Shyam Pandey <radhey.shyam.pandey@....com>,
        Ben Levinsky <ben.levinsky@....com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 3/3] remoteproc: zynqmp: get TCM from device-tree

On 5/9/23 23:48, Tanmay Shah wrote:
> 
> On 9/4/23 2:50 AM, Philippe Mathieu-Daudé wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> On 29/8/23 20:19, Tanmay Shah wrote:
>>> Use new dt bindings to get TCM address and size
>>> information. Also make sure that driver stays
>>> compatible with previous device-tree bindings.
>>> So, if TCM information isn't available in device-tree
>>> for zynqmp platform, hard-coded address of TCM will
>>> be used.
>>>
>>> New platforms that are compatible with this
>>> driver must add TCM support in device-tree as per new
>>> bindings.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Tanmay Shah <tanmay.shah@....com>
>>> ---
>>>    drivers/remoteproc/xlnx_r5_remoteproc.c | 279 +++++++++++++++++++-----
>>>    1 file changed, 221 insertions(+), 58 deletions(-)
>>
>>
>>>    /**
>>> @@ -75,11 +79,17 @@ struct mbox_info {
>>>     * Hardcoded TCM bank values. This will be removed once TCM bindings are
>>>     * accepted for system-dt specifications and upstreamed in linux kernel
>>
>> Just curious, for how long this fall back code has to be maintained?
>> (When/how will we know we can remove it?)
> 
> 
> I believe we should never remove it. It's important that driver works with old bindings as well.

Do you mind posting a followup patch updating the comment,
to clarify?

Thanks,

Phil.