linux-kernel - RE: [PATCH v5 0/4] firmware: arm_scmi: Add SCMI v3.2 pincontrol protocol basic support

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:
 <DU0PR04MB94176621F225DA0316E2734B882D2@DU0PR04MB9417.eurprd04.prod.outlook.com>
Date: Mon, 18 Mar 2024 02:47:06 +0000
From: Peng Fan <peng.fan@....com>
To: Cristian Marussi <cristian.marussi@....com>
CC: "Peng Fan (OSS)" <peng.fan@....nxp.com>, Sudeep Holla
	<sudeep.holla@....com>, Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>, Krzysztof Kozlowski
	<krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org>, Conor Dooley <conor+dt@...nel.org>,
	Oleksii Moisieiev <oleksii_moisieiev@...m.com>, Linus Walleij
	<linus.walleij@...aro.org>, Shawn Guo <shawnguo@...nel.org>, Sascha Hauer
	<s.hauer@...gutronix.de>, Pengutronix Kernel Team <kernel@...gutronix.de>,
	Fabio Estevam <festevam@...il.com>, dl-linux-imx <linux-imx@....com>,
	"linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org"
	<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>, "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org"
	<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, "devicetree@...r.kernel.org"
	<devicetree@...r.kernel.org>, "linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org"
	<linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org>, AKASHI Takahiro <takahiro.akashi@...aro.org>,
	Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>
Subject: RE: [PATCH v5 0/4] firmware: arm_scmi: Add SCMI v3.2 pincontrol
 protocol basic support

> Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 0/4] firmware: arm_scmi: Add SCMI v3.2 pincontrol
> protocol basic support
> 
> On Fri, Mar 15, 2024 at 12:31:51AM +0000, Peng Fan wrote:
> > > Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 0/4] firmware: arm_scmi: Add SCMI v3.2
> > > pincontrol protocol basic support
> > >
> > > On Thu, Mar 14, 2024 at 09:35:17PM +0800, Peng Fan (OSS) wrote:
> > > > Since SCMI 3.2 Spec is released, and this patchset has got
> > > > R-b/T-b, is it ok to land this patchset?
> > > >
> > >
> > > I'll have a look at this last version and a spin on my test setup.
> > >
> > > ...but has this V5 change at all since the Reviewed-by tags due to
> > > the latest spec changes ?
> >
> > The tags are same as V4. I only did a rebase, no more changes.
> > >
> 
> Ok.
> 
> > > ...IOW does this V5 include the latest small bits spec-changes or
> > > those latest gpio-related spec-changes are just not needed at the
> > > level of the Linux pinctrl support as of now and can be added later
> > > on when a Linux gpio driver will be built on top of this ?
> >
> > In my current test, I no need the gpio related changes, so I would add
> > that later if you are ok.
> >
> 
> I COULD have agreed with this, since AFAIK there is currently an effort to add
> support for GPIO on top of SCMI Pinctrl BUT not in Linux, so no reason to
> block this series for gpio-related missing features, that should only be
> additions not breaking backward compatibility...
> 
> ....BUT, I've just wrapped my head again around the latest public release of
> v3.2 spec (which has gone through so many changes and additions that I had
> lost track O_o) AND beside the above mentioned GPIO changes there are
> indeed also BREAKING changes around the commands
> PINCTRL_SETTINGS_GET and PINCTRL_SETTINGS_CONFIGURE (which were
> the old PINCTRL_CONFIG_GET/SET), that now also get/set the selected
> function: so that, at the end the payload itself of those commands/replies has
> also changed IN SIZE, so the driver needs definitely to be updated (and
> whatever you use to test on the backend server too, if you want to test this...)

Ok, I see, there are indeed some changes, I will update the driver.

> 
> I think these changes (which I forgot being there) were in since last month, so
> already V4 was broken in these regards (which I have not looked at)

I may need to drop the R-b/T-b?

> 
> I'll leave some comments along the series and test all of this again next week...
> ...since too many things has changed and I want to re-verify all on my side.

Thanks,
Peng.
> 
> Thanks,
> Cristian