linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v6 3/6] PCI: qcom: Add missing icc bandwidth vote for cpu to PCIe path

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: <cf8093a2-be15-4ec5-8b9e-84d7803ddae3@linaro.org>
Date: Tue, 16 Jan 2024 10:06:47 +0000
From: Bryan O'Donoghue <bryan.odonoghue@...aro.org>
To: Krishna Chaitanya Chundru <quic_krichai@...cinc.com>,
 Bryan O'Donoghue <bryan.odonoghue@...aro.org>,
 Bjorn Andersson <andersson@...nel.org>,
 Konrad Dybcio <konrad.dybcio@...aro.org>, Bjorn Helgaas
 <bhelgaas@...gle.com>, Lorenzo Pieralisi <lpieralisi@...nel.org>,
 Krzysztof Wilczyński <kw@...ux.com>,
 Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>,
 Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org>,
 Conor Dooley <conor+dt@...nel.org>, Manivannan Sadhasivam <mani@...nel.org>,
 Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>, Johan Hovold <johan+linaro@...nel.org>,
 Brian Masney <bmasney@...hat.com>, Georgi Djakov <djakov@...nel.org>
Cc: linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org, vireshk@...nel.org,
 quic_vbadigan@...cinc.com, quic_skananth@...cinc.com,
 quic_nitegupt@...cinc.com, linux-pci@...r.kernel.org,
 devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
 stable@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 3/6] PCI: qcom: Add missing icc bandwidth vote for cpu
 to PCIe path

On 16/01/2024 04:52, Krishna Chaitanya Chundru wrote:
>>
> There is no change required in the dts because the cpu-pcie path is
> already present in the dts.

Not at c4860af88d0cb1bb006df12615c5515ae509f73b its not, those dts 
entries get added later.

But anyway re-reading your commit log "vote for minimum bandwidth as at 
c4860af88d0cb1bb006df12615c5515ae509f73b" makes sense to me.

Reviewed-by: Bryan O'Donoghue <bryan.odonoghue@...aro.org>