linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v5 1/4] dt-bindindgs: i2c: qcom,i2c-geni: Document shared flag

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: <904ae8ea-d970-4b4b-a30a-cd1b65296a9b@kernel.org>
Date: Mon, 2 Dec 2024 12:04:17 +0100
From: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@...nel.org>
To: Mukesh Kumar Savaliya <quic_msavaliy@...cinc.com>,
 konrad.dybcio@...aro.org, andersson@...nel.org, andi.shyti@...nel.org,
 linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org, dmaengine@...r.kernel.org,
 linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-i2c@...r.kernel.org,
 conor+dt@...nel.org, agross@...nel.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
 vkoul@...nel.org, linux@...blig.org, dan.carpenter@...aro.org,
 Frank.Li@....com, konradybcio@...nel.org, bryan.odonoghue@...aro.org,
 krzk+dt@...nel.org, robh@...nel.org
Cc: quic_vdadhani@...cinc.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 1/4] dt-bindindgs: i2c: qcom,i2c-geni: Document shared
 flag

On 02/12/2024 11:38, Mukesh Kumar Savaliya wrote:
>>
>> Come with one flag or enum, if needed, covering all your cases like this.
>>
> Let me explain, this feature is one of the additional software case 
> adding on base protocol support. if we dont have more than one usecase 
> or repurposing this feature, why do we need to add enums ? I see one 
> flag gpi_mode but it's internal to driver not exposed to user or expose 
> any usecase/feature.
> 
> Below was our earlier context, just wanted to add for clarity.
> --
>  > Is sharing of IP blocks going to be also for other devices? If yes, then
>  > this should be one property for all Qualcomm devices. If not, then be
>  > sure that this is the case because I will bring it up if you come with
>  > one more solution for something else.


You keep repeating the same. You won't receive any other answer.

>  >
> IP blocks like SE can be shared. Here we are talking about I2C sharing.
> In future it can be SPI sharing. But design wise it fits better to add
> flag per SE node. Same we shall be adding for SPI too in future.


How flag per SE node is relevant? I did not ask to move the property.

> 
> Please let me know your further suggestions.
We do not talk about I2C or SPI here only. We talk about entire SoC.
Since beginning. Find other patch proposals and align with rest of
Qualcomm developers so that you come with only one definition for this
feature/characteristic. Or do you want to say that I am free to NAK all
further properties duplicating this one?

Please confirm that you Qualcomm engineers understand the last statement
and that every block will use se-shared, even if we speak about UFS for
example.

Best regards,
Krzysztof