linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 11/12] arm64: dts: exynos: gs101: define USI8 with I2C configuration

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: <d1b17379-84b0-465b-a30c-1a1e62d3c86a@linaro.org>
Date: Fri, 29 Dec 2023 14:21:29 +0000
From: Tudor Ambarus <tudor.ambarus@...aro.org>
To: André Draszik <andre.draszik@...aro.org>,
 peter.griffin@...aro.org, robh+dt@...nel.org,
 krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org, mturquette@...libre.com,
 sboyd@...nel.org, conor+dt@...nel.org, andi.shyti@...nel.org,
 alim.akhtar@...sung.com, gregkh@...uxfoundation.org, jirislaby@...nel.org,
 s.nawrocki@...sung.com, tomasz.figa@...il.com, cw00.choi@...sung.com,
 arnd@...db.de, semen.protsenko@...aro.org
Cc: saravanak@...gle.com, willmcvicker@...gle.com,
 linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-samsung-soc@...r.kernel.org,
 linux-clk@...r.kernel.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
 linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-i2c@...r.kernel.org,
 linux-serial@...r.kernel.org, kernel-team@...roid.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 11/12] arm64: dts: exynos: gs101: define USI8 with I2C
 configuration



On 12/29/23 08:04, Tudor Ambarus wrote:
> 
> 
> On 12/28/23 14:04, André Draszik wrote:
>> Hi Tudor,
> 
> Hi!
> 
>>
>> On Thu, 2023-12-28 at 12:58 +0000, Tudor Ambarus wrote:
>>> [...]
>>>
>>> diff --git a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/exynos/google/gs101.dtsi b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/exynos/google/gs101.dtsi
>>> index 0e5b1b490b0b..c6ae33016992 100644
>>> --- a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/exynos/google/gs101.dtsi
>>> +++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/exynos/google/gs101.dtsi
>>> @@ -354,6 +354,35 @@ pinctrl_peric0: pinctrl@...40000 {
>>>  			interrupts = <GIC_SPI 625 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH 0>;
>>>  		};
>>>  
>>> +		usi8: usi@...700c0 {
>>> +			compatible = "google,gs101-usi",
>>> +				     "samsung,exynos850-usi";
>>> +			reg = <0x109700c0 0x20>;
>>> +			ranges;
>>> +			#address-cells = <1>;
>>> +			#size-cells = <1>;
>>> +			clocks = <&cmu_peric0 CLK_GOUT_PERIC0_PERIC0_TOP0_IPCLK_7>,
>>> +				 <&cmu_peric0 CLK_GOUT_PERIC0_CLK_PERIC0_USI8_USI_CLK>;
>>> +			clock-names = "pclk", "ipclk";
>>
>> Given the clock-names, shouldn't the clock indices be the other way around? Also see below.
> 
> You're right, they should have been the other way around! Didn't make
> any difference at testing because the usi driver uses
> clk_bulk_prepare_enable(), what matters is the order of clocks in the
> i2c node, and those are fine.
> 
>>
>>> +			samsung,sysreg = <&sysreg_peric0 0x101c>;
>>> +			status = "disabled";
>>> +
>>> +			hsi2c_8: i2c@...70000 {
>>> +				compatible = "google,gs101-hsi2c",
>>> +					     "samsung,exynosautov9-hsi2c";
>>> +				reg = <0x10970000 0xc0>;
>>> +				interrupts = <GIC_SPI 642 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH 0>;
>>> +				#address-cells = <1>;
>>> +				#size-cells = <0>;
>>> +				pinctrl-names = "default";
>>> +				pinctrl-0 = <&hsi2c8_bus>;
>>> +				clocks = <&cmu_peric0 CLK_GOUT_PERIC0_PERIC0_TOP0_IPCLK_7>,
>>> +					 <&cmu_peric0 CLK_GOUT_PERIC0_CLK_PERIC0_USI8_USI_CLK>;
>>> +				clock-names = "hsi2c", "hsi2c_pclk";
>>
>> Here, pclk == CLK_GOUT_PERIC0_CLK_PERIC0_USI8_USI_CLK (which is correct, I believe), whereas
>> above pclk == CLK_GOUT_PERIC0_PERIC0_TOP0_IPCLK_7
>>
> 
> Indeed, I'll reverse the order for the USI clocks and do some more
> testing. Thanks!

FYI, I reversed the order of the USI clocks, tested again with the
eeprom at 100 KHz and 10KHz, everything went fine. I'll wait for some
other feedback and probably submit a v3 next week.

Cheers,
ta