linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v4 2/2] arm64: dts: qcom: qcs615: Add CPU scaling clock node

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: <263139f2-f149-4615-82ff-584fe44ead2f@oss.qualcomm.com>
Date: Fri, 27 Jun 2025 14:07:47 +0200
From: Konrad Dybcio <konrad.dybcio@....qualcomm.com>
To: Taniya Das <quic_tdas@...cinc.com>,
        Dmitry Baryshkov <dmitry.baryshkov@....qualcomm.com>
Cc: Bjorn Andersson <andersson@...nel.org>,
        Konrad Dybcio <konradybcio@...nel.org>, Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>,
        Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk+dt@...nel.org>,
        Conor Dooley
 <conor+dt@...nel.org>,
        Ajit Pandey <quic_ajipan@...cinc.com>,
        Imran Shaik <quic_imrashai@...cinc.com>,
        Jagadeesh Kona <quic_jkona@...cinc.com>, linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org,
        devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 2/2] arm64: dts: qcom: qcs615: Add CPU scaling clock
 node

On 6/27/25 5:52 AM, Taniya Das wrote:
> 
> 
> On 6/25/2025 5:06 PM, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote:
>> On Wed, Jun 25, 2025 at 04:44:01PM +0530, Taniya Das wrote:
>>> Add cpufreq-hw node to support CPU frequency scaling.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Taniya Das <quic_tdas@...cinc.com>
>>> ---
>>>  arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/qcs615.dtsi | 29 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>>  1 file changed, 29 insertions(+)
>>>
>>> @@ -3891,6 +3907,19 @@ glink_edge: glink-edge {
>>>  				qcom,remote-pid = <2>;
>>>  			};
>>>  		};
>>> +
>>> +		cpufreq_hw: cpufreq@...23000 {
>>> +			compatible = "qcom,sc7180-cpufreq-hw", "qcom,cpufreq-hw";
>>
>> Why? Other platforms use a true SoC as the first entry.
>>
> Dmitry, from cpufreq-hw perspective SC7180 is a exact match for QCS615
> and that was the reason to use the same.

The only compatible consumed by the driver is the last one in this case,
meaning sc7180 is only there so that if we discover quirks very specific
to sc7180 down the line, we can add some exceptions in code

Reusing sc7180 would remove the ability to address any quirks that would
concern qcs615 specifically, which can happen due to hw design, fw
quirks etc.

Konrad