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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <2565aa33-619c-6c90-de96-29dc5ac5d961@linaro.org>
Date:   Sat, 23 Sep 2023 18:13:49 +0200
From:   Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@...aro.org>
To:     Bryan O'Donoghue <bryan.odonoghue@...aro.org>,
        andersson@...nel.org, agross@...nel.org, konrad.dybcio@...aro.org,
        mturquette@...libre.com, sboyd@...nel.org, robh+dt@...nel.org,
        krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org, conor+dt@...nel.org,
        jonathan@...ek.ca, quic_tdas@...cinc.com,
        vladimir.zapolskiy@...aro.org
Cc:     linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org, linux-clk@...r.kernel.org,
        devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/4] dt-bindings: clock: qcom,camcc.yaml: Convert
 qcom,camcc to a single yaml file

On 23/09/2023 17:00, Bryan O'Donoghue wrote:
> Move the various camcc yaml files into one. The Camera Clock Controller
> is pretty similar from SoC to SoC.
> 
> Mostly we have some SoCs which require fewer clocks than others. In some
> cases we have SoCs which have required-opps and required-power-domains.
> 
> It is likely we could and should extend the thin CAMCC descriptions such
> as sdm845 an sm6350 to the more robust descriptions such as sm8250 and
> sm8450.
> 
> As a result of listing sm8250 and sm8450 together required-opps and
> power-domains become required for sm8250, which is a NOP for the dtsi
> since both declarations already exist for sm8250.
> 
> sm8250 is also chosen as the example for the new combined camcc.yaml.
> 
> A minor tweak to fix Bjorn's email address in the Maintainer list is
> included.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Bryan O'Donoghue <bryan.odonoghue@...aro.org>

No, that's not the right approach. For GCC and CamCC and all other
Qualcomm clock controllers, we split into device schemas, not merge into
one. The one schema is just becoming unreviewable over time with
multiple if:then clauses.

Please use approach like we have for GCC, RPMh interconnects or remote
proc loaders - common file. What's more, here you probably don't even
need common file because it is already there - qcom,gcc.yaml

Best regards,
Krzysztof

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ