linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] firmware: qcom: scm: Allow devicetree-less probe

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: <547C76B7-8E41-44C3-8433-374B4E6BC341@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 21 Sep 2024 00:45:19 -0700
From: Rudraksha Gupta <guptarud@...il.com>
To: Dmitry Baryshkov <dmitry.baryshkov@...aro.org>
Cc: Elliot Berman <quic_eberman@...cinc.com>,
 Bjorn Andersson <andersson@...nel.org>,
 Konrad Dybcio <konradybcio@...nel.org>,
 Bartosz Golaszewski <bartosz.golaszewski@...aro.org>,
 Andrew Halaney <ahalaney@...hat.com>,
 "Linux regression tracking (Thorsten Leemhuis)" <regressions@...mhuis.info>,
 linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
 Bartosz Golaszewski <brgl@...ev.pl>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] firmware: qcom: scm: Allow devicetree-less probe

> Which devicetrees? I assume that this mostly concerns arm32 machines,
> but I don't see if you have tested this on any of them. Also on some of
> those machines SCM require additional clocks, I don't see that being
> handled in the patch.
> 
> If we are to manually instantiate SCM node, I'd prefer for it to be
> explicit, e.g. MSM8x60, create SCM device, using this-and-that clock.

I believe the consensus was that we will be using your one liner fix instead of this. If I misunderstood, please let me know and I will happily test this patch.