linux-kernel - [PATCH] cpufreq: ti-cpufreq: Use socinfo to get revision in AM62 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-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20240902092135.2826470-1-d-gole@ti.com>
Date: Mon, 2 Sep 2024 14:51:35 +0530
From: Dhruva Gole <d-gole@...com>
To: <rafael@...nel.org>, <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>
CC: <linux-pm@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Dhruva Gole
	<d-gole@...com>, Nishanth Menon <nm@...com>,
        Vignesh Raghavendra
	<vigneshr@...com>,
        Vibhore Vardhan <vibhore@...com>, Bryan Brattlof
	<bb@...com>
Subject: [PATCH] cpufreq: ti-cpufreq: Use socinfo to get revision in AM62 family

In the AM62x, AM62Ax, and AM62Px devices, we already have the revision
info within the k3-socinfo driver. Hence, re-use this information from
there instead of re using the offset for 2 drivers trying to get the
same information ie. revision.

Signed-off-by: Dhruva Gole <d-gole@...com>
---

Hi,
This patch depends on [1] and if someone wants to test, can use my
github branch [2]. I was able to test this on SK-AM625 [3].

[1] https://lore.kernel.org/linux-arm-kernel/20240828131915.3198081-1-nm@ti.com/
[2] https://github.com/DhruvaG2000/v-linux/tree/ti-cpufreq-revision-fix
[3] https://gist.github.com/DhruvaG2000/d0c360b0bd7e43d0fd28cfe3eab941d2

Cc: Nishanth Menon <nm@...com>
Cc: Vignesh Raghavendra <vigneshr@...com>
Cc: Vibhore Vardhan <vibhore@...com>
Cc: Bryan Brattlof <bb@...com>

---
 drivers/cpufreq/ti-cpufreq.c | 19 +++++++++++++++++++
 1 file changed, 19 insertions(+)

diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/ti-cpufreq.c b/drivers/cpufreq/ti-cpufreq.c
index 804329e81eb8..ba621ce1cdda 100644
--- a/drivers/cpufreq/ti-cpufreq.c
+++ b/drivers/cpufreq/ti-cpufreq.c
@@ -16,6 +16,7 @@
 #include <linux/pm_opp.h>
 #include <linux/regmap.h>
 #include <linux/slab.h>
+#include <linux/sys_soc.h>
 
 #define REVISION_MASK				0xF
 #define REVISION_SHIFT				28
@@ -303,6 +304,13 @@ static struct ti_cpufreq_soc_data am3517_soc_data = {
 	.quirks = TI_QUIRK_SYSCON_MAY_BE_MISSING,
 };
 
+static const struct soc_device_attribute k3_cpufreq_soc[] = {
+	{ .family = "AM62X", .revision = "SR1.0" },
+	{ .family = "AM62AX", .revision = "SR1.0" },
+	{ .family = "AM62PX", .revision = "SR1.0" },
+	{ /* sentinel */ }
+};
+
 static struct ti_cpufreq_soc_data am625_soc_data = {
 	.efuse_xlate = am625_efuse_xlate,
 	.efuse_offset = 0x0018,
@@ -384,6 +392,16 @@ static int ti_cpufreq_get_rev(struct ti_cpufreq_data *opp_data,
 	struct device *dev = opp_data->cpu_dev;
 	u32 revision;
 	int ret;
+	if (soc_device_match(k3_cpufreq_soc)) {
+		/*
+		 * Since the SR is 1.0, hard code the revision_value as
+		 * 0x1 here. This way we avoid re using the same register
+		 * that is giving us required information inside socinfo
+		 * anyway.
+		 */
+		*revision_value = 0x1;
+		goto done;
+	}
 
 	ret = regmap_read(opp_data->syscon, opp_data->soc_data->rev_offset,
 			  &revision);
@@ -406,6 +424,7 @@ static int ti_cpufreq_get_rev(struct ti_cpufreq_data *opp_data,
 
 	*revision_value = BIT((revision >> REVISION_SHIFT) & REVISION_MASK);
 
+done:
 	return 0;
 }
 

base-commit: ecc768a84f0b8e631986f9ade3118fa37852fef0
-- 
2.34.1