linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3 2/2] dt-bindings: perf: starfive: Add StarLink PMU

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: <20231116-penalize-turbojet-bf8ea2a9a2ad@squawk>
Date:   Thu, 16 Nov 2023 14:34:00 +0000
From:   Conor Dooley <conor@...nel.org>
To:     Ji Sheng Teoh <jisheng.teoh@...rfivetech.com>
Cc:     conor+dt@...nel.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
        krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org, leyfoon.tan@...rfivetech.com,
        linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        mark.rutland@....com, peterz@...radead.org, robh+dt@...nel.org,
        tglx@...utronix.de, will@...nel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 2/2] dt-bindings: perf: starfive: Add StarLink PMU

On Thu, Nov 16, 2023 at 10:10:35AM +0800, Ji Sheng Teoh wrote:
> On Wed, 15 Nov 2023 20:03:53 +0000
> Conor Dooley <conor@...nel.org> wrote:
> > On Wed, Nov 15, 2023 at 11:36:08AM +0800, Ji Sheng Teoh wrote:
> > > Add device tree binding for StarFive's StarLink PMU (Performance
> > > Monitor Unit).
> > > 
> > > Signed-off-by: Ji Sheng Teoh <jisheng.teoh@...rfivetech.com>
> > > ---
> > >  .../bindings/perf/starfive,starlink-pmu.yaml  | 46
> > > +++++++++++++++++++ 1 file changed, 46 insertions(+)
> > >  create mode 100644
> > > Documentation/devicetree/bindings/perf/starfive,starlink-pmu.yaml
> > > 
> > > diff --git
> > > a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/perf/starfive,starlink-pmu.yaml
> > > b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/perf/starfive,starlink-pmu.yaml
> > > new file mode 100644 index 000000000000..a9426a7faeae --- /dev/null
> > > +++
> > > b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/perf/starfive,starlink-pmu.yaml
> > >  
> > 
> > btw, since you changed the compatible, the filename should have been
> > changed to match it.
> 
> The intention to keep the filename generic is to allow addition of new
> version of StarLink PMU in future if any, similar to what arm,cmn.yaml
> is doing. Hope that makes sense.

No, please keep the filename matching the compatible. Even if the
filename contains "500", there's nothing stopping you from then adding
other pmu variants. There are many many examples of this in the tree.

> > > @@ -0,0 +1,46 @@
> > > +# SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0-only OR BSD-2-Clause
> > > +%YAML 1.2
> > > +---
> > > +$id: http://devicetree.org/schemas/perf/starfive,starlink-pmu.yaml#
> > > +$schema: http://devicetree.org/meta-schemas/core.yaml#
> > > +
> > > +title: StarFive StarLink PMU
> > > +
> > > +maintainers:
> > > +  - Ji Sheng Teoh <jisheng.teoh@...rfivetech.com>
> > > +
> > > +description:
> > > +  StarFive's StarLink PMU integrates one or more CPU cores with a
> > > shared L3
> > > +  memory system. The PMU support overflow interrupt, up to 16
> > > programmable
> > > +  64bit event counters, and an independent 64bit cycle counter.
> > > +  StarLink PMU is accessed via MMIO.
> > > +
> > > +properties:
> > > +  compatible:
> > > +    const: starfive,starlink-500-pmu  
> > 
> > So this is not what I had in mind by a "device". I was looking for a
> > compatible representing an soc in which this IP had been integrated.
> > A soc-specific compatible, rather than something generic, is
> > requirement for devicetree - we don't want various integrations of
> > this IP to all be using a generic compatible when there may be subtle
> > (or less subtle) differences between integrations.
> > 
> > I'm trying to come up with the syntax for enforcing having two
> > compatibles with your current one as the fallback, but I have yet to
> > come up with the correct syntax for that that works correctly.
> > 
> > Hopefully by the time you get some feedback on the driver side of this
> > submission I will have a concrete suggestion for what to do here.
> 
> Thanks Conor for the enlightenment. In the meantime, to fit the requirement
> I would suggest going for "starfive,jh8100-starlink-pmu", making it JH8100
> SOC specific if that makes sense.

Okay, you could definitely do that!

Cheers,
Conor.

Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (229 bytes)