linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH V6 3/4] dt-bindings: interconnect: Add generic compatible qcom,epss-l3-perf

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: <CD9BA30C-C38F-4F3B-9823-B8F5B4160BC6@linaro.org>
Date: Wed, 27 Nov 2024 21:45:32 +0200
From: Dmitry Baryshkov <dmitry.baryshkov@...aro.org>
To: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@...nel.org>, Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>
CC: Raviteja Laggyshetty <quic_rlaggysh@...cinc.com>,
 Georgi Djakov <djakov@...nel.org>, Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk+dt@...nel.org>,
 Conor Dooley <conor+dt@...nel.org>, Bjorn Andersson <andersson@...nel.org>,
 Konrad Dybcio <konradybcio@...nel.org>,
 Odelu Kukatla <quic_okukatla@...cinc.com>,
 Mike Tipton <quic_mdtipton@...cinc.com>,
 Sibi Sankar <quic_sibis@...cinc.com>, linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org,
 linux-pm@...r.kernel.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
 linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH V6 3/4] dt-bindings: interconnect: Add generic compatible qcom,epss-l3-perf

On 27 November 2024 21:22:02 EET, Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@...nel.org> wrote:
>On 27/11/2024 19:49, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote:
>> On 27 November 2024 20:27:27 EET, Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@...nel.org> wrote:
>>> On 27/11/2024 17:53, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote:
>>>> On Wed, Nov 27, 2024 at 08:23:04AM -0600, Rob Herring wrote:
>>>>> On Mon, Nov 25, 2024 at 05:45:10PM +0000, Raviteja Laggyshetty wrote:
>>>>>> EPSS instance on sc7280, sm8250 SoCs, use PERF_STATE register instead of
>>>>>> REG_L3_VOTE to scale L3 clocks, hence adding a new generic compatible
>>>>>> "qcom,epss-l3-perf" for these targets.
>>>>>
>>>>> Is this a h/w difference from prior blocks or you just want to use B 
>>>>> instead of A while the h/w has both A and B? The latter sounds like 
>>>>> driver policy.
>>>>>
>>>>> It is also an ABI break for s/w that didn't understand 
>>>>> qcom,epss-l3-perf.
>>>>
>>>> As the bindings keep old compatible strings in addition to the new
>>>> qcom,epss-l3-perf, where is the ABI break? Old SW will use old entries,
>>>> newer can use either of those.
>>> No, this change drops qcom,epss-l3 and adds new fallback. How old
>>> software can work in such case? It's broken.
>> 
>> Oh, I see. We had a platform-specific overrides for those two. Then I think we should completely drop the new qcom,epss-l3-perf idea and follow the sm8250 / sc7280 example. This means compatible = "qcom,sa8775p-perf", "qcom,epss-l3". 
>
>It depends for example whether epss-l3 is valid at all. ABI is not
>broken if nothing was working in the first place, assuming it is
>explained in commit msg (not the case here).

Judging by the current schema, epss-l3 is defined as new HW block of aka not OSM L3, no matter which register is used for programming.


>
>Best regards,
>Krzysztof