linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 0/5] SC8280XP SLPI

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: <aC18owkQSMfNwKUC@hovoldconsulting.com>
Date: Wed, 21 May 2025 09:11:31 +0200
From: Johan Hovold <johan@...nel.org>
To: Konrad Dybcio <konrad.dybcio@....qualcomm.com>
Cc: Konrad Dybcio <konradybcio@...nel.org>,
	Bjorn Andersson <andersson@...nel.org>,
	Mathieu Poirier <mathieu.poirier@...aro.org>,
	Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>,
	Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk+dt@...nel.org>,
	Conor Dooley <conor+dt@...nel.org>,
	Manivannan Sadhasivam <manivannan.sadhasivam@...aro.org>,
	Marijn Suijten <marijn.suijten@...ainline.org>,
	linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org, linux-remoteproc@...r.kernel.org,
	devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Dmitry Baryshkov <dmitry.baryshkov@....qualcomm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/5] SC8280XP SLPI

On Tue, May 20, 2025 at 04:29:18PM +0200, Konrad Dybcio wrote:
> On 5/19/25 11:35 AM, Johan Hovold wrote:
> > On Sat, May 17, 2025 at 07:27:49PM +0200, Konrad Dybcio wrote:

> >> Dmitry Baryshkov (1):
> >>       arm64: dts: qcom: sc8280xp-lenovo-thinkpad-x13s: enable sensors DSP
> > 
> > At first I was worried that missing firmware could cause issues here
> > (e.g. drivers not reaching sync state as with venus), but Lenovo has
> > indeed released the SLPI firmware already.

> >> Konrad Dybcio (4):
> >>       dt-bindings: remoteproc: qcom,sm8350-pas: Add SC8280XP
> >>       arm64: dts: qcom: sc8280xp: Fix node order
> >>       arm64: dts: qcom: sc8280xp: Add SLPI
> > 
> >>       arm64: dts: qcom: sc8280xp-crd: Enable SLPI
> > 
> > Without firmware this results in errors like:
> > 
> > 	remoteproc remoteproc0: slpi is available
> > 	remoteproc remoteproc0: Direct firmware load for qcom/sc8280xp/qcslpi8280.mbn failed with error -2
> > 	remoteproc remoteproc0: powering up slpi
> > 	remoteproc remoteproc0: Direct firmware load for qcom/sc8280xp/qcslpi8280.mbn failed with error -2
> > 	remoteproc remoteproc0: request_firmware failed: -2
> > 
> > but enabling for the CRD reference design and requiring users (read:
> > developers) to copy it from Windows should be OK.
> 
> We shouldn't expect non-developers to have the CRD on hand, right? ;)

That was my point: requiring user of the CRD to install firmware
manually is fine (e.g. as they would all be developers and currently all
firmware for the CRD needs to be copied from Windows anyway).

But we should not enable things like venus (that can prevent the
interconnect driver from reaching the sync state) on the X13s which has
lots of regular users until the corresponding firmware has been
released and is in linux-firmware.

Johan