linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 2/3] arm64: dts: ti: Introduce J742S2 SoC family

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: <20240731041916.stcbvkr6ovd7t5vk@uda0497581>
Date: Wed, 31 Jul 2024 09:49:16 +0530
From: Manorit Chawdhry <m-chawdhry@...com>
To: Nishanth Menon <nm@...com>
CC: Vignesh Raghavendra <vigneshr@...com>, Tero Kristo <kristo@...nel.org>,
        Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>,
        Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk+dt@...nel.org>,
        Conor Dooley <conor+dt@...nel.org>,
        <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>, <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
        <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Udit Kumar
	<u-kumar1@...com>,
        Neha Malcom Francis <n-francis@...com>,
        Aniket Limaye
	<a-limaye@...com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/3] arm64: dts: ti: Introduce J742S2 SoC family

Hi Nishanth,

On 07:33-20240730, Nishanth Menon wrote:
> On 12:43-20240730, Manorit Chawdhry wrote:
> > This device is a subset of J784S4 and shares the same memory map and
> > thus the nodes are being reused from J784S4 to avoid duplication.
> > 
> > Here are some of the salient features of the J742S2 automotive grade
> > application processor:
> > 
> > The J742S2 SoC belongs to the K3 Multicore SoC architecture platform,
> > providing advanced system integration in automotive, ADAS and industrial
> > applications requiring AI at the network edge. This SoC extends the K3
> > Jacinto 7 family of SoCs with focus on raising performance and
> > integration while providing interfaces, memory architecture and compute
> > performance for multi-sensor, high concurrency applications.
> > 
> > Some changes that this devices has from J784S4 are:
> > * 4x Cortex-A72 vs 8x Cortex-A72
> > * 3x C7x DSP vs 4x C7x DSP
> > * 4 port ethernet switch vs 8 port ethernet switch
> > 
> > ( Refer Table 2-1 for Device comparison with J7AHP )
> > Link: https://www.ti.com/lit/pdf/spruje3 (TRM)
> > Signed-off-by: Manorit Chawdhry <m-chawdhry@...com>
> > ---
> >  arch/arm64/boot/dts/ti/k3-j742s2-main.dtsi | 44 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> >  arch/arm64/boot/dts/ti/k3-j742s2.dtsi      | 26 ++++++++++++++++++
> >  2 files changed, 70 insertions(+)
> > 
[...]
> > + */
> > +
> > +#include "k3-j784s4.dtsi"
> > +
> > +/ {
> > +	model = "Texas Instruments K3 J742S2 SoC";
> > +	compatible = "ti,j742s2";
> > +
> > +	cpus {
> > +		cpu-map {
> > +			/delete-node/ cluster1;
> > +		};
> > +	};
> > +
> > +	/delete-node/ cpu4;
> > +	/delete-node/ cpu5;
> > +	/delete-node/ cpu6;
> > +	/delete-node/ cpu7;
> 
> I suggest refactoring by renaming the dtsi files as common and split out
> j784s4 similar to j722s/am62p rather than using /delete-node/
> 

I don't mind the suggestion Nishanth if there is a reason behind it.
Could you tell why we should not be using /delete-node/? 

Regards,
Manorit

> 
> > +};
> > +
> > +#include "k3-j742s2-main.dtsi"
> > 
> > -- 
> > 2.45.1
> > 
> 
> -- 
> Regards,
> Nishanth Menon
> Key (0xDDB5849D1736249D) / Fingerprint: F8A2 8693 54EB 8232 17A3  1A34 DDB5 849D 1736 249D