linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 00/16] dt-bindings: clock: qcom: reference qcom-gcc.yaml

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: Sat, 1 Jun 2024 23:29:14 -0500
From: Bjorn Andersson <andersson@...nel.org>
To: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@...aro.org>
Cc: Dmitry Baryshkov <dmitry.baryshkov@...aro.org>, 
	Michael Turquette <mturquette@...libre.com>, Stephen Boyd <sboyd@...nel.org>, Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>, 
	Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk+dt@...nel.org>, Conor Dooley <conor+dt@...nel.org>, 
	Taniya Das <quic_tdas@...cinc.com>, Konrad Dybcio <konrad.dybcio@...ainline.org>, 
	Jonathan Marek <jonathan@...ek.ca>, Del Regno <angelogioacchino.delregno@...ainline.org>, 
	Loic Poulain <loic.poulain@...aro.org>, Neil Armstrong <neil.armstrong@...aro.org>, 
	Konrad Dybcio <konrad.dybcio@...aro.org>, linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org, linux-clk@...r.kernel.org, 
	devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/16] dt-bindings: clock: qcom: reference qcom-gcc.yaml

On Fri, May 31, 2024 at 05:19:19PM GMT, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> On 31/05/2024 17:14, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote:
> > On Fri, May 31, 2024 at 03:52:18PM +0200, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> Unify Qualcomm clock controllers by referencing qcom,gcc.yaml where
> >> applicable.  Several existing bindings for these display/GPU/CAM clock
> >> controllers already do it.
> > 
> > The series looks good to me with a single point in mind. You are writing
> > that dispcc/videocc/etc are a variant of GCC. However GCC is a Global
> > Clock Controller. 
> 
> Yeah, that's simplification from my side and assumption that at first
> they designed GCC and then they copied the design to other blocks.
> 

That may or may not be the case, who knows... I also don't have a strong
opinion about tying it all to gcc.yaml if that work...

But the claim in the commit messages should the be that we inherit
gcc.yaml because it's convenient, not because all clock controllers are
derived from gcc.

Regards,
Bjorn

> > What about renaming qcom,gcc.yaml to
> > qcom,cc-common.yaml ? Then the rest makes total sense to me.
> 
> Several gpu/disp/cam clock controllers already include qcom,gcc.yaml, so
> I would say this should not be a requirement for this patchset.
> 
> We can rename, although it always is a bit of churn - git log needs
> special option, backporting is a bit trickier.
> 
> 
> Best regards,
> Krzysztof
>