linux-kernel - Re: [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-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20240903090945.rqqqrchwadustegn@vireshk-i7>
Date: Tue, 3 Sep 2024 14:39:45 +0530
From: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>
To: Dhruva Gole <d-gole@...com>
Cc: rafael@...nel.org, linux-pm@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Nishanth Menon <nm@...com>,
	Vignesh Raghavendra <vigneshr@...com>,
	Vibhore Vardhan <vibhore@...com>, Bryan Brattlof <bb@...com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] cpufreq: ti-cpufreq: Use socinfo to get revision in AM62
 family

On 02-09-24, 14:51, Dhruva Gole wrote:
> 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;
>  }

Applied. Thanks.

-- 
viresh