linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] arm64: dts: qcom: ipq6018: add #power-domain-cells for gcc node

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: Thu, 4 Jan 2024 18:40:53 +0800
From: Fenglin Wu <quic_fenglinw@...cinc.com>
To: Robert Marko <robimarko@...il.com>,
        Konrad Dybcio
	<konrad.dybcio@...aro.org>,
        Dmitry Baryshkov <dmitry.baryshkov@...aro.org>,
        <quic_tdas@...cinc.com>, <quic_aiquny@...cinc.com>
CC: <kernel@...cinc.com>, Andy Gross <agross@...nel.org>,
        Bjorn Andersson
	<andersson@...nel.org>,
        Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
        Krzysztof Kozlowski
	<krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org>,
        Conor Dooley <conor+dt@...nel.org>, <linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org>,
        <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] arm64: dts: qcom: ipq6018: add #power-domain-cells for
 gcc node



On 1/4/2024 6:32 PM, Robert Marko wrote:
> 
> On 04. 01. 2024. 11:16, Konrad Dybcio wrote:
>> On 4.01.2024 11:13, Fenglin Wu wrote:
>>>
>>> On 1/4/2024 5:53 PM, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote:
>>>> On Thu, 4 Jan 2024 at 10:06, Fenglin Wu via B4 Relay
>>>> <devnull+quic_fenglinw.quicinc.com@...nel.org> wrote:
>>>>> From: Fenglin Wu <quic_fenglinw@...cinc.com>
>>>>>
>>>>> Property '#power-domain-cells' is required as per defined in 
>>>>> qcom,gcc.yaml
>>>>> so add it for ipq6018 gcc device node to eliminate following 
>>>>> warning in
>>>>> dtbs_check:
>>>>>
>>>>> arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/ipq6018-cp01-c1.dtb: gcc@...0000:
>>>>>           '#power-domain-cells' is a required property
>>>>> from schema $id: 
>>>>> http://devicetree.org/schemas/clock/qcom,gcc-ipq6018.yaml#
>>>> But ipq6018 doesn't implement GDSC support. So for the sake of fixing
>>>> the warning you are adding a bogus property.
>>>>
>>> I agree. However, there are also some gcc drivers not implementing 
>>> GDSC support but the bindings are adding '#power-domain-cells' in the 
>>> DT example, such as: qcom,gcc-apq8064.yaml, qcom,gcc-ipq4019.yaml, 
>>> qcom,gcc-ipq6018.yaml, qcom,gcc-ipq8064.yaml, qcom,gcc-msm8660.yaml.
>>>
>>> Actually I thought that maybe we should do a clean up by removing 
>>> '#power-domain-cells' out of the qcom,gcc.yaml binding and only 
>>> adding it into individual qcom,gcc-xxx.yaml for the driver which has 
>>> implemented GDSC support. I checked this with Taniya offline, but she 
>>> prefers only fixing it in ipq6018.dtsi as it doesn't hurt anything by 
>>> adding the property, and she expects the GDSC support should be 
>>> existing in most of qcom,gcc drivers especially the newer Qcom chipsets.
>> Before we start changing anything, we should assess whether these
>> platforms actually have GDSCs within this clock controller block,
>> even if they are (currently) not described in the clk driver.
> Hi,
> IPQ6018 has GDSC-s, at least for the USB-s.
> I tried configuring them a while ago, but the USB2.0 GDSC seems to 
> either have a HW bug or
> it uses some special configuration as its status bits never show that 
> its ON [1].
> 
> [1] 
> https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/linux-arm-msm/patch/20231025104457.628109-2-robimarko@gmail.com/
> 
Thanks for the link! I checked the spec internal, and I did see GDSC 
device for USB0/USB1 controller is present in GCC clock controller.
So considering there is a patch ongoing to add GDSC device for ipq6018 
gcc driver, can the DT commit which adds '#power-domain-cells' be accepted?

> Regards,
> Robert
> 
>>
>> Konrad