linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v1] arm64: dts: qcom: sa8775p: Add UART node

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: <045d7a80-378d-4622-b2e1-01665f627818@quicinc.com>
Date: Fri, 12 Jul 2024 15:02:01 +0530
From: Viken Dadhaniya <quic_vdadhani@...cinc.com>
To: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@...nel.org>,
        Konrad Dybcio
	<konrad.dybcio@...aro.org>, <andersson@...nel.org>,
        <robh@...nel.org>, <krzk+dt@...nel.org>,
        <linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org>, <conor+dt@...nel.org>,
        <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
CC: <quic_msavaliy@...cinc.com>, <quic_anupkulk@...cinc.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1] arm64: dts: qcom: sa8775p: Add UART node



On 7/11/2024 11:47 AM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> On 11/07/2024 07:04, Viken Dadhaniya wrote:
>>>>> +				clock-names = "se";
>>>>> +				interconnects = <&clk_virt MASTER_QUP_CORE_2 QCOM_ICC_TAG_ALWAYS
>>>>> +						 &clk_virt SLAVE_QUP_CORE_2 QCOM_ICC_TAG_ALWAYS>,
>>>>> +						<&gem_noc MASTER_APPSS_PROC QCOM_ICC_TAG_ALWAYS
>>>>> +						 &config_noc SLAVE_QUP_2 QCOM_ICC_TAG_ALWAYS>;
>>>>> +				interconnect-names = "qup-core", "qup-config";
>>>>> +				power-domains = <&rpmhpd SA8775P_CX>;
>>>>
>>>> All the clocks, interconenct and power domains look to me questionable.
>>>> AFAIK, most of it (if not all) is going to be removed.
>>>
>>> Yeah.. I'm lukewarm on accepting any sa8775p changes until that qcs9100(?)
>>> situation is squared out first
>>>
>>> Konrad
>>
>> Thanks for clarification. Please help to sign-off or let me know in case
>> of any concern.
> 
> I think I was quite explicit, so I feel above suggestion as still
> pushing your choice even though to reviewers gave you their opinion.
> 
> In such case:
> 
> No, NAK, for the reasons stated above.
> 
> Best regards,
> Krzysztof
> 

Sure, taken the notes from both of you.
Shall we wait for the shifting of DTSI file from sc8775p to qcs9100 ?
OR is there any other way to move ahead ?
Please suggest, we shall do whatever guidance from you both.