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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <6a4cccb4-9e55-437d-925b-5f5bb1804159@foss.st.com>
Date: Fri, 11 Oct 2024 14:07:50 +0200
From: Gatien CHEVALLIER <gatien.chevallier@...s.st.com>
To: Marek Vasut <marex@...x.de>, 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 13:24, Marek Vasut wrote:
> 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 ?

I guess you meant, the core first.
Putting the bus clock first with the updated YAML doc generates a
warning when checking the bindings. I guess what you propose is OK
then. Core clock is defined first in the device tree.