linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v7 2/2] irqchip: irq-qcom-mpm: Support passing a slice of SRAM as reg space

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: <b71982c3-9f28-4586-8528-3a4f5dbc6eae@linaro.org>
Date:   Sat, 9 Dec 2023 15:23:10 +0100
From:   Konrad Dybcio <konrad.dybcio@...aro.org>
To:     Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        Andy Gross <agross@...nel.org>,
        Bjorn Andersson <andersson@...nel.org>,
        Marc Zyngier <maz@...nel.org>,
        Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
        Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org>,
        Shawn Guo <shawn.guo@...aro.org>,
        Conor Dooley <conor+dt@...nel.org>
Cc:     Marijn Suijten <marijn.suijten@...ainline.org>,
        linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
        Bryan O'Donoghue <bryan.odonoghue@...aro.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 2/2] irqchip: irq-qcom-mpm: Support passing a slice of
 SRAM as reg space

On 8.12.2023 15:37, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 27 2023 at 16:52, Konrad Dybcio wrote:
> 
> The prefix in the subject is wrong. Also please write out register. This
> is not Xitter.
Had a feeling it would be too long, but actually it'd be perfect
72 chars :)

> 
>> The MPM hardware is accessible to us from the ARM CPUs through a shared
> 
> to us? Can you access that hardware? I doubt it.
With a small enough "stick".. but I get your point

> 
> Please use neutral tone as documented in Documentation/process/
> 
>> memory region (RPM MSG RAM) that's also concurrently accessed by other
>> kinds of cores on the system (like modem, ADSP etc.). Modeling this
>> relation in a (somewhat) sane manner in the device tree basically
>> requires us to either present the MPM as a child of said memory region
>> (which makes little sense, as a mapped memory carveout is not a bus),
>> define nodes which bleed their register spaces into one another, or
>> passing their slice of the MSG RAM through some kind of a property.
>>
>> Go with the third option and add a way to map a region passed through
>> the "qcom,rpm-msg-ram" property as our register space.
>>
>> The current way of using 'reg' is preserved for ABI reasons.
> 
> It's not an ABI reason. It's backwards compatibility with old device
> trees, right?
Yes, I thought of something else.

> 
> I'll fix it up for you this time. No need to resend.
Thanks!

Konrad