linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/4] hwrng: stm32 - implement support for STM32MP25x platforms

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: <b4932f99-cda4-42ef-88d8-461ca6e8cefd@denx.de>
Date: Fri, 11 Oct 2024 13:24:38 +0200
From: Marek Vasut <marex@...x.de>
To: Gatien CHEVALLIER <gatien.chevallier@...s.st.com>,
 Olivia Mackall <olivia@...enic.com>, Herbert Xu
 <herbert@...dor.apana.org.au>, Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
 Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org>,
 Conor Dooley <conor+dt@...nel.org>,
 Maxime Coquelin <mcoquelin.stm32@...il.com>,
 Alexandre Torgue <alexandre.torgue@...s.st.com>
Cc: Uwe Kleine-König <u.kleine-koenig@...gutronix.de>,
 Lionel Debieve <lionel.debieve@...s.st.com>, linux-crypto@...r.kernel.org,
 devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-stm32@...md-mailman.stormreply.com,
 linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
 Yang Yingliang <yangyingliang@...wei.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/4] hwrng: stm32 - implement support for STM32MP25x
 platforms

On 10/11/24 11:55 AM, Gatien CHEVALLIER wrote:
> 
> 
> On 10/7/24 15:54, Marek Vasut wrote:
>> On 10/7/24 3:27 PM, Gatien Chevallier wrote:
>>> Implement the support for STM32MP25x platforms. On this platform, a
>>> security clock is shared between some hardware blocks. For the RNG,
>>> it is the RNG kernel clock. Therefore, the gate is no more shared
>>> between the RNG bus and kernel clocks as on STM32MP1x platforms and
>>> the bus clock has to be managed on its own.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Gatien Chevallier <gatien.chevallier@...s.st.com>
>> A bit of a higher-level design question -- can you use drivers/clk/ 
>> clk-bulk.c clk_bulk_*() to handle all these disparate count of clock 
>> easily ?
> 
> Hi, I'd like to make sure that we enable the core clock before the bus
> clock so that the RNG hardware block can start its internal tests while
> we ungate the bus clock. It's not a strong opinion but it feels better.
Maybe this could still work if the struct clk_bulk_data {} is ordered 
that way, so the bus clock are first, and the rest afterward ?