linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/3] iommu/arm-smmu: add ACTLR data and support for SM8550

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]

Date:   Sat, 4 Nov 2023 12:29:37 +0100
From:   Konrad Dybcio <konrad.dybcio@...aro.org>
To:     Bibek Kumar Patro <quic_bibekkum@...cinc.com>, will@...nel.org,
        robin.murphy@....com, joro@...tes.org, dmitry.baryshkov@...aro.org,
        a39.skl@...il.com, quic_saipraka@...cinc.com,
        quic_pkondeti@...cinc.com, quic_molvera@...cinc.com
Cc:     linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, iommu@...ts.linux.dev,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, qipl.kernel.upstream@...cinc.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] iommu/arm-smmu: add ACTLR data and support for SM8550



On 11/3/23 22:51, Bibek Kumar Patro wrote:
> Add ACTLR data table for SM8550 along with support for
> same including SM8550 specific implementation operations.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Bibek Kumar Patro <quic_bibekkum@...cinc.com>
> ---
>   drivers/iommu/arm/arm-smmu/arm-smmu-qcom.c | 85 +++++++++++++++++++++-
>   1 file changed, 81 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/iommu/arm/arm-smmu/arm-smmu-qcom.c b/drivers/iommu/arm/arm-smmu/arm-smmu-qcom.c
> index 68c1f4908473..590b7c285299 100644
> --- a/drivers/iommu/arm/arm-smmu/arm-smmu-qcom.c
> +++ b/drivers/iommu/arm/arm-smmu/arm-smmu-qcom.c
> @@ -25,6 +25,64 @@ struct actlr_data {
>   	u32 actlr;
>   };
> 
> +static const struct actlr_data sm8550_apps_actlr_data[] = {
I assume this data will be different for each SoC.. perhaps
moving this to a separate file (not sure if dt makes sense if
it's hardcoded per platform) makes sense.

This will also assume that these can not differ between firmware
versions.

Konrad