linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 3/3] dt-bindings: mailbox: mediatek: Avoid clock-names on MT8188 GCE

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: <20240620-prize-cavalier-01460bf50050@spud>
Date: Thu, 20 Jun 2024 17:16:40 +0100
From: Conor Dooley <conor@...nel.org>
To: AngeloGioacchino Del Regno <angelogioacchino.delregno@...labora.com>
Cc: Conor Dooley <conor.dooley@...rochip.com>, krzk+dt@...nel.org,
	mturquette@...libre.com, sboyd@...nel.org, robh@...nel.org,
	conor+dt@...nel.org, matthias.bgg@...il.com,
	jassisinghbrar@...il.com, garmin.chang@...iatek.com,
	houlong.wei@...iatek.com, Jason-ch.Chen@...iatek.com,
	amergnat@...libre.com, Elvis.Wang@...iatek.com,
	linux-clk@...r.kernel.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
	linux-mediatek@...ts.infradead.org, kernel@...labora.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] dt-bindings: mailbox: mediatek: Avoid clock-names on
 MT8188 GCE

On Thu, Jun 20, 2024 at 10:32:36AM +0200, AngeloGioacchino Del Regno wrote:
> Il 20/06/24 10:22, Conor Dooley ha scritto:
> > On Thu, Jun 20, 2024 at 10:01:18AM +0200, AngeloGioacchino Del Regno wrote:
> > > Il 19/06/24 19:49, Conor Dooley ha scritto:
> > > > On Wed, Jun 19, 2024 at 10:53:22AM +0200, AngeloGioacchino Del Regno wrote:
> > > > > Add mediatek,mt8188-gce to the list of compatibles for which the
> > > > > clock-names property is not required.
> > > > 
> > > > Because, I assume, it has some internal clock? Why do either of these
> > > > things have no clock? Doesn't the internal logic require one?
> > > > 
> > > 
> > > Because there's no gce0/gce1 clock, there's only an infracfg_AO clock that is
> > > for one GCE instance, hence there's no need to require clock-names.
> > 
> > clock-names, d'oh. I misread that completely yesterday.
> > 
> > > I can't remove the clock-names requirement from the older compatibles though,
> > > because the (sorry about this word) driver (eh..) gets the clock by name for
> > > the single GCE SoCs...
> > > 
> > > ...and here comes a self-NACK for this commit, I have to fix the driver and
> > > then stop requiring clock-names on all compatibles, instead of having this
> > > ugly nonsense.
> > 
> > Is it not worth keeping the clock names, even if ugly or w/e, because
> > things have been done that way for a while?
> 
> It's worth allowing clock-names, but *requiring* that is unnecessary because
> there is, and there will always be, only one clock...!

Right, dunno if I misread you earlier or misunderstood. Fighting fires
at work and replying to mails mid bisection is what I am going to blame
;)

> > Also, what does U-Boot do on these systems to get the clocks?
> > 
> 
> U-Boot doesn't support GCE at all (no driver - at least upstream)...!

Running LIFO through my mailbox today, seeing this after the other
mail..

> 
> > > Self-note: gce0/gce1 clocks lookup was implemented in the driver but never
> > > used and never added to the binding - luckily.
> > > 
> > > Sorry Conor, I just acknowledged that there's a better way of doing that.
> > > 
> > > Thank you for making me re-read this stuff, I'll send the proper changes
> > > later today, driver change + binding change in a separate series.
> > > 
> > > As for the other two commits in this series, completely unrelated to GCE,
> > > those are still fine, and are fixing dtbs_check warnings.
> 
> 

Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (229 bytes)