linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 05/28] spi: dt-bindings: samsung: add samsung,spi-fifosize property

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, 25 Jan 2024 19:01:10 +0000
From: Tudor Ambarus <tudor.ambarus@...aro.org>
To: Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
Cc: andi.shyti@...nel.org, arnd@...db.de, robh+dt@...nel.org,
 krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org, conor+dt@...nel.org,
 alim.akhtar@...sung.com, linux-spi@...r.kernel.org,
 linux-samsung-soc@...r.kernel.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
 linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
 linux-arch@...r.kernel.org, andre.draszik@...aro.org,
 peter.griffin@...aro.org, semen.protsenko@...aro.org,
 kernel-team@...roid.com, willmcvicker@...gle.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 05/28] spi: dt-bindings: samsung: add
 samsung,spi-fifosize property

On 1/25/24 17:45, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 25, 2024 at 05:30:53PM +0000, Tudor Ambarus wrote:
>> On 1/25/24 17:26, Mark Brown wrote:
> 
>>> OK, so just the compatible is enough information then?
> 
>> For gs101, yes. All the gs101 SPI instances are configured with 64 bytes
>> FIFO depths. So instead of specifying the FIFO depth for each SPI node,
>> we can infer the FIFO depth from the compatible.
> 
> But this is needed for other SoCs?  This change is scattered through a

There are SoCs that have multiple instances of the SPI IP, and they
configure them with different FIFO depths. See
"samsung,exynosautov9-spi" for example: SPI0, SPI1, and SPI6 are
configured by the SoC to use 256 bytes FIFO depths, while all the other
8 SPI instances use 64 bytes FIFOs. I tried to explain the entire logic
of the series in another reply, see it here:
https://lore.kernel.org/linux-arm-kernel/40ba9481-4aea-4a72-87bd-c2db319be069@linaro.org/T/#u

> very large series which does multiple things so it's a bit difficult to
> follow what's going on here.

Sorry, I was afraid that this might happen. I agree, I'll split tomorrow
this patch set in 3 smaller sets:
1/ dumb cleaning patches
2/ heavy lifting cleaning patches
3/ gs101 addition