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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date: Tue, 21 May 2024 10:22:42 +0200
From: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@...aro.org>
To: Alexandre Mergnat <amergnat@...libre.com>,
 AngeloGioacchino Del Regno <angelogioacchino.delregno@...labora.com>,
 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

On 20/05/2024 17:23, Alexandre Mergnat wrote:
> 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.

I don't see how this could be related. The error is mentioning entirely
different node - mmsys. No driver binds to 10006000.syscon, except the
MFD syscon of course, so my change should have zero effect on drivers.

The mtk-pm-domains (so child of patch affected in 3/4) only takes regmap
from the parent, so the cells again are not related.

Just to be sure: you are testing mainline or next, without any other
patches on top except mine?

> 

Best regards,
Krzysztof