linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH V2 1/2] dt-bindings: firmware: arm,scmi: introduce property mbox-rx-timeout-ms

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: <ZoatADKjBfpRCeLz@pluto>
Date: Thu, 4 Jul 2024 15:09:04 +0100
From: Cristian Marussi <cristian.marussi@....com>
To: Peng Fan <peng.fan@....com>
Cc: Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@....com>,
	"Peng Fan (OSS)" <peng.fan@....nxp.com>,
	"cristian.marussi@....com" <cristian.marussi@....com>,
	"robh@...nel.org" <robh@...nel.org>,
	"krzk+dt@...nel.org" <krzk+dt@...nel.org>,
	"conor+dt@...nel.org" <conor+dt@...nel.org>,
	"linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org" <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"arm-scmi@...r.kernel.org" <arm-scmi@...r.kernel.org>,
	"devicetree@...r.kernel.org" <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH V2 1/2] dt-bindings: firmware: arm,scmi: introduce
 property mbox-rx-timeout-ms

On Thu, Jul 04, 2024 at 12:33:09PM +0000, Peng Fan wrote:
> > Subject: Re: [PATCH V2 1/2] dt-bindings: firmware: arm,scmi: introduce
> > property mbox-rx-timeout-ms
> > 
> > On Thu, Jul 04, 2024 at 10:39:53AM +0000, Peng Fan wrote:
> > > > Subject: Re: [PATCH V2 1/2] dt-bindings: firmware: arm,scmi:
> > > > introduce property mbox-rx-timeout-ms
> > > >
> > > > On Wed, Jul 03, 2024 at 11:17:14AM +0800, Peng Fan (OSS) wrote:
> > > > > From: Peng Fan <peng.fan@....com>
> > > > >
> > > > > System Controller Management Interface(SCMI) firmwares might
> > > > have
> > > > > different designs by SCMI firmware developers. So the maximum
> > > > receive
> > > > > channel timeout value might also varies in the various designs.
> > > > >
> > > > > So introduce property mbox-rx-timeout-ms to let each platform
> > > > > could set its own timeout value in device tree.
> > > > >
> > > > > Signed-off-by: Peng Fan <peng.fan@....com>
> > > > > ---
> > > > >
> > > > > V2:
> > > > >  Drop defaults, update description.
> > > > >
> > > > >  Documentation/devicetree/bindings/firmware/arm,scmi.yaml | 6
> > > > ++++++
> > > > >  1 file changed, 6 insertions(+)
> > > > >
> > > > > diff --git
> > > > a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/firmware/arm,scmi.yaml
> > > > > b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/firmware/arm,scmi.yaml
> > > > > index ebf384e76df1..dcac0b36c76f 100644
> > > > > ---
> > a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/firmware/arm,scmi.yaml
> > > > > +++
> > b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/firmware/arm,scmi.yaml
> > > > > @@ -121,6 +121,12 @@ properties:
> > > > >        atomic mode of operation, even if requested.
> > > > >      default: 0
> > > > >
> > > > > +  max-rx-timeout-ms:
> > > > > +    description:
> > > > > +      An optional time value, expressed in milliseconds,
> > > > > + representing
> > > > the
> > > > > +      mailbox maximum timeout value for receive channel. The
> > > > > + value
> > > > should
> > > > > +      be a non-zero value if set.
> > > > > +
> > > >
> > > > IIRC, you had the min and max constraint in the earlier response.
> > > > You need to have rushed and posted another version before I could
> > > > respond with my preference.
> > > >
> > > > So there is no rush, these are v6.12 material. Take time for
> > > > respining and give some time for the review.
> > >
> > > Sure. I just not sure what the maximum should be set, so I drop the
> > > minimum and maximum from my previous email.
> > >
> > 
> > Worst case we can just have min constraint to indicate it must be non-
> > zero value as you have mentioned above and drop that statement as it
> > becomes explicit with the constraint.
> 
> I'll use below in v3:
>   max-rx-timeout-ms:                                                                                
>     description:                                                                                    
>       An optional time value, expressed in milliseconds, representing the                           
>       mailbox maximum timeout value for receive channel. The value should                           
>       be a non-zero value if set.                                                                   
>     minimum: 1
> 
> Put the binding away, when you have time, please check
> whether the driver changes are good or not.
> BTW, since our Android team is waiting for this patchset
> got R-b or A-b, then the patches could be accepted by Google common
> kernel, we could support GKI in our release which is soon in near
> days. So I am being pushed :) 

Hi Peng,

once the bindings are accepted I wanted to fold also this series of
yours in my transport rework series.

Thanks,
Cristian