linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/4] arm64: dts: mediatek: mt8365: use a specific SCPSYS compatible

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: <51a47736-ffe8-49e2-b798-d409ca587501@baylibre.com>
Date: Mon, 20 May 2024 17:23:11 +0200
From: Alexandre Mergnat <amergnat@...libre.com>
To: AngeloGioacchino Del Regno <angelogioacchino.delregno@...labora.com>,
 Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@...aro.org>,
 Lee Jones <lee@...nel.org>, Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>,
 Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk+dt@...nel.org>, Conor Dooley
 <conor+dt@...nel.org>, Matthias Brugger <matthias.bgg@...il.com>,
 MandyJH Liu <mandyjh.liu@...iatek.com>, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
 linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
 linux-mediatek@...ts.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/4] arm64: dts: mediatek: mt8365: use a specific SCPSYS
 compatible

Hello Krzysztof,

On 20/05/2024 12:12, AngeloGioacchino Del Regno wrote:
> Il 20/05/24 12:03, Krzysztof Kozlowski ha scritto:
>> On 20/05/2024 11:55, AngeloGioacchino Del Regno wrote:
>>> Il 18/05/24 23:11, Krzysztof Kozlowski ha scritto:
>>>> SoCs should use dedicated compatibles for each of their syscon nodes to
>>>> precisely describe the block.  Using an incorrect compatible does not
>>>> allow to properly match/validate children of the syscon device.  Replace
>>>> SYSCFG compatible, which does not have children, with a new dedicated
>>>> one for SCPSYS block.
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@...aro.org>
>>>
>>> Technically, that's not a SCPSYS block, but called SYSCFG in MT8365, but the
>>> meaning and the functioning is the same, so it's fine for me.
>>
>> So there are two syscfg blocks? With exactly the same set of registers
>> or different?
>>
> 
> I'm not sure about that, I don't have the MT8365 datasheet...
> 
> Adding Alexandre to the loop - I think he can clarify as he should have the
> required documentation.

Unfortunately, The SCPSYS (@10006000) isn't documented, but according to the functionnal 
specification, it seems to have only one block.

I don't have the history why SYSCFG instead of SCPSYS.

I've tested your serie and have a regression at the kernel boot time:
[    7.738117] mtk-power-controller 10006000.syscon:power-controller: Failed to create device link 
(0x180) with 14000000.syscon

It's related to your patch 3/4.

-- 
Regards,
Alexandre