linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v9 1/8] remoteproc: qcom: Add PRNG proxy clock

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, 22 Jun 2024 00:08:17 +0300
From: Dmitry Baryshkov <dmitry.baryshkov@...aro.org>
To: Gokul Sriram Palanisamy <quic_gokulsri@...cinc.com>
Cc: sboyd@...nel.org, andersson@...nel.org, bjorn.andersson@...aro.org, 
	david.brown@...aro.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org, jassisinghbrar@...il.com, 
	linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org, linux-clk@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, 
	linux-remoteproc@...r.kernel.org, mark.rutland@....com, mturquette@...libre.com, ohad@...ery.com, 
	robh@...nel.org, sricharan@...eaurora.org, gokulsri@...eaurora.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v9 1/8] remoteproc: qcom: Add PRNG proxy clock

On Fri, Jun 21, 2024 at 05:16:52PM GMT, Gokul Sriram Palanisamy wrote:
> PRNG clock is needed by the secure PIL, support for the same
> is added in subsequent patches.

Which 'same'?
What is 'secure PIL'?

> 
> Signed-off-by: Nikhil Prakash V <quic_nprakash@...cinc.com>
> Signed-off-by: Sricharan R <quic_srichara@...cinc.com>
> Signed-off-by: Gokul Sriram Palanisamy <quic_gokulsri@...cinc.com>
> ---
>  drivers/remoteproc/qcom_q6v5_wcss.c | 65 +++++++++++++++++++++--------
>  1 file changed, 47 insertions(+), 18 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/remoteproc/qcom_q6v5_wcss.c b/drivers/remoteproc/qcom_q6v5_wcss.c
> index 94f68c919ee6..366b19cbd994 100644
> --- a/drivers/remoteproc/qcom_q6v5_wcss.c
> +++ b/drivers/remoteproc/qcom_q6v5_wcss.c
> @@ -91,19 +91,6 @@ enum {
>  	WCSS_QCS404,
>  };
>  
> -struct wcss_data {
> -	const char *firmware_name;
> -	unsigned int crash_reason_smem;
> -	u32 version;
> -	bool aon_reset_required;
> -	bool wcss_q6_reset_required;
> -	const char *ssr_name;
> -	const char *sysmon_name;
> -	int ssctl_id;
> -	const struct rproc_ops *ops;
> -	bool requires_force_stop;
> -};
> -
>  struct q6v5_wcss {
>  	struct device *dev;
>  
> @@ -128,6 +115,7 @@ struct q6v5_wcss {
>  	struct clk *qdsp6ss_xo_cbcr;
>  	struct clk *qdsp6ss_core_gfmux;
>  	struct clk *lcc_bcr_sleep;
> +	struct clk *prng_clk;
>  	struct regulator *cx_supply;
>  	struct qcom_sysmon *sysmon;
>  
> @@ -151,6 +139,21 @@ struct q6v5_wcss {
>  	struct qcom_rproc_ssr ssr_subdev;
>  };
>  
> +struct wcss_data {
> +	int (*init_clock)(struct q6v5_wcss *wcss);
> +	int (*init_regulator)(struct q6v5_wcss *wcss);
> +	const char *firmware_name;
> +	unsigned int crash_reason_smem;
> +	u32 version;
> +	bool aon_reset_required;
> +	bool wcss_q6_reset_required;
> +	const char *ssr_name;
> +	const char *sysmon_name;
> +	int ssctl_id;
> +	const struct rproc_ops *ops;
> +	bool requires_force_stop;
> +};

Move this back and use forward-declaration of struct q6v5_wcss.

> +
>  static int q6v5_wcss_reset(struct q6v5_wcss *wcss)
>  {
>  	int ret;

-- 
With best wishes
Dmitry