linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH RFC v2 1/5] dt-bindings: clock: histb-clock: Add missing common clock and Hi3798MV200 specific clock definition

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:
 <SEZPR06MB6959456E59D84C15F0C1B88396502@SEZPR06MB6959.apcprd06.prod.outlook.com>
Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2024 22:06:45 +0800
From: Yang Xiwen <forbidden405@...look.com>
To: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@...aro.org>,
 Michael Turquette <mturquette@...libre.com>, Stephen Boyd
 <sboyd@...nel.org>, Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
 Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org>,
 Conor Dooley <conor+dt@...nel.org>
Cc: David Yang <mmyangfl@...il.com>, linux-clk@...r.kernel.org,
 devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC v2 1/5] dt-bindings: clock: histb-clock: Add missing
 common clock and Hi3798MV200 specific clock definition

On 2/20/2024 6:10 PM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> On 17/02/2024 13:52, Yang Xiwen via B4 Relay wrote:
>> From: Yang Xiwen <forbidden405@...look.com>
>>
>> According to the datasheet, some clocks are missing, add their
>> definitions first.
>>
>> Some aliases for hi3798mv200 are also introduced.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Yang Xiwen <forbidden405@...look.com>
>> ---
>>   include/dt-bindings/clock/histb-clock.h | 21 +++++++++++++++++++++
>>   1 file changed, 21 insertions(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/include/dt-bindings/clock/histb-clock.h b/include/dt-bindings/clock/histb-clock.h
>> index e64e5770ada6..68a53053586a 100644
>> --- a/include/dt-bindings/clock/histb-clock.h
>> +++ b/include/dt-bindings/clock/histb-clock.h
>> @@ -58,6 +58,27 @@
>>   #define HISTB_USB3_UTMI_CLK1		48
>>   #define HISTB_USB3_PIPE_CLK1		49
>>   #define HISTB_USB3_SUSPEND_CLK1		50
>> +#define HISTB_SDIO1_BIU_CLK		51
>> +#define HISTB_SDIO1_CIU_CLK		52
>> +#define HISTB_SDIO1_DRV_CLK		53
>> +#define HISTB_SDIO1_SAMPLE_CLK		54
>> +#define HISTB_ETH0_PHY_CLK		55
>> +#define HISTB_ETH1_PHY_CLK		56
>> +#define HISTB_WDG0_CLK			57
>> +#define HISTB_USB2_UTMI0_CLK		HISTB_USB2_UTMI_CLK
> Why? It's anyway placed oddly, the entries are ordered by number/value.


So this is somewhat broken at the beginning. It named after 
histb-clock.h but actually they are all clocks for Hi3798CV200 SoC. For 
Hi3798MV200(also a HiSTB SoC), there is one additional UTMI clock.


What solution do you prefer? rename UTMI_CLK to UTMI0_CLK, add UTMI1_CLK 
after it and increment all the indexes after it? Then the diff would be 
very ugly.


>
>> +#define HISTB_USB2_UTMI1_CLK		58
>> +#define HISTB_USB3_REF_CLK		59
>> +#define HISTB_USB3_GM_CLK		60
>> +#define HISTB_USB3_GS_CLK		61
>> +
>> +/* Hi3798MV200 specific clocks */
>> +
>> +// reuse clocks of histb
> Don't mix comment styles.
>
>> +#define HI3798MV200_GMAC_CLK		HISTB_ETH0_MAC_CLK
>> +#define HI3798MV200_GMACIF_CLK		HISTB_ETH0_MACIF_CLK
>> +#define HI3798MV200_FEMAC_CLK		HISTB_ETH1_MAC_CLK
>> +#define HI3798MV200_FEMACIF_CLK		HISTB_ETH1_MACIF_CLK
>> +#define HI3798MV200_FEPHY_CLK		HISTB_ETH1_PHY_CLK
> I don't understand what do you want to achieve here. Clock IDs start
> from 0 or 1.
>
>
>
> Best regards,
> Krzysztof
>

-- 
Regards,
Yang Xiwen