| 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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <f9713d5e-68a8-497e-8a1a-9398ad1246cb@quicinc.com>
Date: Thu, 8 May 2025 13:37:57 +0800
From: Yuanfang Zhang <quic_yuanfang@...cinc.com>
To: Suzuki K Poulose <suzuki.poulose@....com>,
Mike Leach
<mike.leach@...aro.org>,
James Clark <james.clark@...aro.org>, Rob Herring
<robh@...nel.org>,
Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk+dt@...nel.org>,
Conor Dooley
<conor+dt@...nel.org>,
Alexander Shishkin
<alexander.shishkin@...ux.intel.com>
CC: <kernel@....qualcomm.com>, <linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org>,
<coresight@...ts.linaro.org>, <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
<devicetree@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 2/2] coresight: add coresight Trace Network On Chip
driver
On 5/7/2025 7:59 PM, Suzuki K Poulose wrote:
> On 07/05/2025 09:52, Suzuki K Poulose wrote:
>> On 07/05/2025 05:26, Yuanfang Zhang wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> On 5/6/2025 7:20 PM, Suzuki K Poulose wrote:
>>>> On 14/04/2025 10:16, Yuanfang Zhang wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On 4/11/2025 5:59 PM, Suzuki K Poulose wrote:
>>>>>> On 11/04/2025 09:57, Yuanfang Zhang wrote:
>>>>>>> Add a driver to support Coresight device Trace Network On Chip (TNOC),
>>>>>>> which is an integration hierarchy integrating functionalities of TPDA
>>>>>>> and funnels. It aggregates the trace and transports to coresight trace
>>>>>>> bus.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Compared to current configuration, it has the following advantages:
>>>>>>> 1. Reduce wires between subsystems.
>>>>>>> 2. Continue cleaning the infrastructure.
>>>>>>> 3. Reduce Data overhead by transporting raw data from source to target.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> +------------------------+ +-------------------------+
>>>>>>> | Video Subsystem | |Video Subsystem |
>>>>>>> | +-------------+ | | +------------+ |
>>>>>>> | | Video TPDM | | | | Video TPDM | |
>>>>>>> | +-------------+ | | +------------+ |
>>>>>>> | | | | | |
>>>>>>> | v | | v |
>>>>>>> | +---------------+ | | +-----------+ |
>>>>>>> | | Video funnel | | | |Video TNOC | |
>>>>>>> | +---------------+ | | +-----------+ |
>>>>>>> +------------|-----------+ +------------|------------+
>>>>>>> | |
>>>>>>> v-----+ |
>>>>>>> +--------------------|---------+ |
>>>>>>> | Multimedia v | |
>>>>>>> | Subsystem +--------+ | |
>>>>>>> | | TPDA | | v
>>>>>>> | +----|---+ | +---------------------+
>>>>>>> | | | | Aggregator TNOC |
>>>>>>> | | | +----------|----------+
>>>>>>> | +-- | |
>>>>>>> | | | |
>>>>>>> | | | |
>>>>>>> | +------v-----+ | |
>>>>>>> | | Funnel | | |
>>>>>>> | +------------+ | |
>>>>>>> +----------------|-------------+ |
>>>>>>> | |
>>>>>>> v v
>>>>>>> +--------------------+ +------------------+
>>>>>>> | Coresight Sink | | Coresight Sink |
>>>>>>> +--------------------+ +------------------+
>>>>>>
>>>>>> If each NOC has TraceID, how do you reliably decode the trace ?
>>>>>> Is there a single NOC/TPDA in the path from Source to sink ?
>>>>>
>>>>> Not each TNOC has TraceID, there is only one TNOC has TraceID for one path
>>>>> from Source to sink. In the example, only the aggregator TNOC has traceID.
>>>>> Decode trace relying on TraceID + Inport number.
>>>>> It can has mutiple TNOC/TPDA in one path.
>>>>
>>>> So do we only describe the TNOCs that need traceId in the DT ? (e.g., Aggregator TNOC above ?) How about Video TNOC ? Don't we allocate a
>>>> trace id for it by default, when it is described ?
>>>>
>>>> Suzuki
>>>>
>>> yes, now only describe the TNOCs which need traceID, Video TNOC is another type, it is interconnect TNOC which collects trace from subsystems
>>> and transfers Aggr TNOC, it doesn't have ATID. Its driver is different from this patch, I want to describe it when upstream its driver.
>
> So, if both are TNOC and there different types of them, how do you plan
> to identify, which is what ?
>
I will describe interconnect TNOC as a platform device because it doesn't have PID register.
It will have a compatible "qcom,coresight-interconnect-tnoc".
> And we also have a dt-bindings which simply says "coresight-tnoc". Isn't too generic if it is meant to be "aggregator" ?
>
aggregator TNOC is generic TNOC, the dt-bindings is for this generic TNOC. interconnect TNOC is special TNOC, There will be a separate dt-bindings to describe it.
> Suzuki
>
>
>
>>
>> Thanks! Please could you make sure to describe all of this when sending
>> out a patch in the cover letter ?
>>
sure, will update the cover letter.
>> Cheers
>> Suzuki
>>
>>
>>>
>>> Yuanfang
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists