linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 0/4] memory: tegra210-emc: Support Device Tree EMC Tables

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: <CALHNRZ-q7W9CfeD4ipmwFVqHm7oGfTgJpwNoVhfbSXFPDxF91Q@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 8 May 2025 06:37:53 -0500
From: Aaron Kling <webgeek1234@...il.com>
To: Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@...il.com>
Cc: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@...nel.org>, Jonathan Hunter <jonathanh@...dia.com>, Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>, 
	Conor Dooley <conor+dt@...nel.org>, Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk+dt@...nel.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, 
	linux-tegra@...r.kernel.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/4] memory: tegra210-emc: Support Device Tree EMC Tables

On Thu, May 8, 2025 at 2:41 AM Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@...il.com> wrote:
>
> On Thu, May 08, 2025 at 01:07:37AM -0500, Aaron Kling via B4 Relay wrote:
> > Signed-off-by: Aaron Kling <webgeek1234@...il.com>
> > ---
> > Changes in v2:
> > - Add patch to describe the emc table bindings
> > - Add patch to allow a fallback compatible on the tegra210 emc device to
> >   match firmware expectations
> > - Add a patch to include the baseline emc tables on p2180
> > - Link to v1: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20250430-tegra210-emc-dt-v1-1-99896fa69341@gmail.com
> >
> > ---
> > Aaron Kling (4):
> >       dt-bindings: memory-controllers: Describe Tegra210 EMC Tables
> >       dt-bindings: memory-controllers: tegra210: Allow fallback compatible
> >       arm64: tegra: Add EMC timings to P2180
> >       memory: tegra210-emc: Support Device Tree EMC Tables
> >
> >  .../nvidia,tegra21-emc-table.yaml                  |  1692 +
> >  .../memory-controllers/nvidia,tegra210-emc.yaml    |    44 +-
> >  arch/arm64/boot/dts/nvidia/tegra210-p2180-emc.dtsi | 49749 +++++++++++++++++++
> >  arch/arm64/boot/dts/nvidia/tegra210-p2180.dtsi     |     1 +
> >  drivers/memory/tegra/tegra210-emc-core.c           |   246 +-
> >  5 files changed, 51721 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)
>
> We've had discussions about this in the past, and I don't think this is
> going to go anywhere. Device tree maintainers have repeatedly said that
> they won't accept this kind of binding, which is, admittedly, a bit non-
> sensical. 50,000 lines of DT for EMC tables is just crazy.
>
> The existing binary table bindings were created to avoid the need for
> this. I don't know how easy this is to achieve for all bootloaders, but
> the expectation was that these tables should be passed in their native
> format.

Mmm, this would definitely be an issue with my long term end goal of
supporting the SHIELD t210 devices on mainline. The bootloader on
those devices cannot be replaced due to secure boot and that variant
of the bootloader only supports this dt table for emc. And support
without emc reclocking would be rather unusable as a consumer media
device. Unless the devices could get a bootloader update switching to
the reserved memory tables before they go eol, but I don't see that as
likely.

So I guess the question goes to Krzysztof. I didn't have the bindings
or a copy of the tables in v1 of this series, mostly due to a
misunderstanding, and was fairly asked to add them. That's this
revision. Would you consider accepting this after any fixes? Or is
this concept entirely dead in the water?

Sincerely,
Aaron