linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v5 2/5] dt-bindings: net: wireless: brcm4329-fmac: add clock description for AP6275P

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: <191030eac78.279b.9b12b7fc0a3841636cfb5e919b41b954@broadcom.com>
Date: Tue, 30 Jul 2024 11:52:59 +0200
From: Arend Van Spriel <arend.vanspriel@...adcom.com>
To: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@...nel.org>, Jacobe Zang <jacobe.zang@...ion.com>, <robh@...nel.org>, <krzk+dt@...nel.org>, <heiko@...ech.de>, <kvalo@...nel.org>, <davem@...emloft.net>, <edumazet@...gle.com>, <kuba@...nel.org>, <pabeni@...hat.com>, <conor+dt@...nel.org>, Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>
CC: <efectn@...tonmail.com>, <dsimic@...jaro.org>, <jagan@...eble.ai>, <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>, <linux-rockchip@...ts.infradead.org>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, <arend@...adcom.com>, <linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org>, <netdev@...r.kernel.org>, <megi@....cz>, <duoming@....edu.cn>, <bhelgaas@...gle.com>, <minipli@...ecurity.net>, <brcm80211@...ts.linux.dev>, <brcm80211-dev-list.pdl@...adcom.com>, <nick@...das.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 2/5] dt-bindings: net: wireless: brcm4329-fmac: add clock description for AP6275P

On July 30, 2024 11:01:43 AM Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@...nel.org> wrote:

> On 30/07/2024 08:37, Arend Van Spriel wrote:
>> + Linus W
>>
>> On July 30, 2024 5:31:15 AM Jacobe Zang <jacobe.zang@...ion.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Not only AP6275P Wi-Fi device but also all Broadcom wireless devices allow
>>> external low power clock input. In DTS the clock as an optional choice in
>>> the absence of an internal clock.
>>>
>>> Reviewed-by: Arend van Spriel <arend.vanspriel@...adcom.com>
>>> Signed-off-by: Jacobe Zang <jacobe.zang@...ion.com>
>>> ---
>>> .../bindings/net/wireless/brcm,bcm4329-fmac.yaml          | 8 ++++++++
>>> 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+)
>>>
>>> diff --git
>>> a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/wireless/brcm,bcm4329-fmac.yaml
>>> b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/wireless/brcm,bcm4329-fmac.yaml
>>> index 2c2093c77ec9a..a3607d55ef367 100644
>>> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/wireless/brcm,bcm4329-fmac.yaml
>>> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/wireless/brcm,bcm4329-fmac.yaml
>>> @@ -122,6 +122,14 @@ properties:
>>> NVRAM. This would normally be filled in by the bootloader from platform
>>> configuration data.
>>>
>>> +  clocks:
>>> +    items:
>>> +      - description: External Low Power Clock input (32.768KHz)
>>> +
>>> +  clock-names:
>>> +    items:
>>> +      - const: lpo
>>> +
>>
>> We still have an issue that this clock input is also present in the
>> bindings specification broadcom-bluetooth.yaml (not in bluetooth
>> subfolder). This clock is actually a chip resource. What happens if both
>> are defined and both wifi and bt drivers try to enable this clock? Can this
>> be expressed in yaml or can we only put a textual warning in the property
>> descriptions?
>
> Just like all clocks, what would happen? It will be enabled.

Oh, wow! Cool stuff. But seriously is it not a problem to have two entities 
controlling one and the same clock? Is this use-case taken into account by 
the clock framework?

Regards,
Arend