| 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: <02bf01dbea8c$fc835cb0$f58a1610$@samsung.com>
Date: Tue, 1 Jul 2025 19:05:15 +0530
From: "Shradha Todi" <shradha.t@...sung.com>
To: "'Krzysztof Kozlowski'" <krzk@...nel.org>, "'Rob Herring'"
<robh@...nel.org>
Cc: <linux-pci@...r.kernel.org>, <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>, <linux-samsung-soc@...r.kernel.org>,
<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-phy@...ts.infradead.org>,
<linux-fsd@...la.com>, <mani@...nel.org>, <lpieralisi@...nel.org>,
<kw@...ux.com>, <bhelgaas@...gle.com>, <jingoohan1@...il.com>,
<krzk+dt@...nel.org>, <conor+dt@...nel.org>, <alim.akhtar@...sung.com>,
<vkoul@...nel.org>, <kishon@...nel.org>, <arnd@...db.de>,
<m.szyprowski@...sung.com>, <jh80.chung@...sung.com>,
<pankaj.dubey@...sung.com>
Subject: RE: [PATCH v2 07/10] dt-bindings: phy: Add PHY bindings support for
FSD SoC
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@...nel.org>
> Sent: 01 July 2025 16:55
> To: Shradha Todi <shradha.t@...sung.com>; 'Rob Herring' <robh@...nel.org>
> Cc: linux-pci@...r.kernel.org; devicetree@...r.kernel.org; linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org; linux-
> samsung-soc@...r.kernel.org; linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org; linux-phy@...ts.infradead.org; linux-
> fsd@...la.com; mani@...nel.org; lpieralisi@...nel.org; kw@...ux.com; bhelgaas@...gle.com;
> jingoohan1@...il.com; krzk+dt@...nel.org; conor+dt@...nel.org; alim.akhtar@...sung.com;
> vkoul@...nel.org; kishon@...nel.org; arnd@...db.de; m.szyprowski@...sung.com;
> jh80.chung@...sung.com; pankaj.dubey@...sung.com
> Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 07/10] dt-bindings: phy: Add PHY bindings support for FSD SoC
>
> On 01/07/2025 13:06, Shradha Todi wrote:
> >
> >
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>
> >> Sent: 28 June 2025 02:47
> >> To: Shradha Todi <shradha.t@...sung.com>
> >> Cc: linux-pci@...r.kernel.org; devicetree@...r.kernel.org; linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org;
> > linux-
> >> samsung-soc@...r.kernel.org; linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org; linux-phy@...ts.infradead.org; linux-
> >> fsd@...la.com; manivannan.sadhasivam@...aro.org; lpieralisi@...nel.org; kw@...ux.com;
> >> bhelgaas@...gle.com; jingoohan1@...il.com; krzk+dt@...nel.org; conor+dt@...nel.org;
> >> alim.akhtar@...sung.com; vkoul@...nel.org; kishon@...nel.org; arnd@...db.de;
> >> m.szyprowski@...sung.com; jh80.chung@...sung.com; pankaj.dubey@...sung.com
> >> Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 07/10] dt-bindings: phy: Add PHY bindings support for FSD SoC
> >>
> >> On Wed, Jun 25, 2025 at 10:22:26PM +0530, Shradha Todi wrote:
> >>> Document PHY device tree bindings for Tesla FSD SoCs.
> >>>
> >>> Signed-off-by: Shradha Todi <shradha.t@...sung.com>
> >>> ---
> >>> .../bindings/phy/samsung,exynos-pcie-phy.yaml | 25 +++++++++++++++++--
> >>> 1 file changed, 23 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> >>>
> >>> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/phy/samsung,exynos-pcie-phy.yaml
> >> b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/phy/samsung,exynos-pcie-phy.yaml
> >>> index 41df8bb08ff7..4dc20156cdde 100644
> >>> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/phy/samsung,exynos-pcie-phy.yaml
> >>> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/phy/samsung,exynos-pcie-phy.yaml
> >>> @@ -15,10 +15,13 @@ properties:
> >>> const: 0
> >>>
> >>> compatible:
> >>> - const: samsung,exynos5433-pcie-phy
> >>> + enum:
> >>> + - samsung,exynos5433-pcie-phy
> >>> + - tesla,fsd-pcie-phy
> >>>
> >>> reg:
> >>> - maxItems: 1
> >>> + minItems: 1
> >>> + maxItems: 2
> >>>
> >>> samsung,pmu-syscon:
> >>> $ref: /schemas/types.yaml#/definitions/phandle
> >>> @@ -30,6 +33,24 @@ properties:
> >>> description: phandle for FSYS sysreg interface, used to control
> >>> sysreg registers bits for PCIe PHY
> >>>
> >>> +allOf:
> >>> + - if:
> >>> + properties:
> >>> + compatible:
> >>> + contains:
> >>> + enum:
> >>> + - tesla,fsd-pcie-phy
> >>> + then:
> >>> + description:
> >>> + The PHY controller nodes are represented in the aliases node
> >>> + using the following format 'pciephy{n}'. Depending on whether
> >>> + n is 0 or 1, the phy init sequence is chosen.
> >>
> >> What? Don't make up your own aliases.
> >>
> >> If the PHY instances are different, then maybe you need a different
> >> compatible. If this is just selecting the PHY mode, you can do that in
> >> PHY cells as the mode depends on the consumer.
> >>
> >
> > FSD PCIe has 2 instances of PHY. Both are the same HW Samsung
> > PHYs (Therefore share the same register offsets). But the PHY used here
>
> So same?
>
> > does not support auto adaptation so we need to tune the PHYs
> > according to the use case (considering channel loss, etc). This is why we
>
> So not same? Decide. Either it is same or not, cannot be both.
>
> If you mean that some wiring is different on the board, then how does it
> differ in soc thus how it is per-soc property? If these are use-cases,
> then how is even suitable for DT?
>
> I use your Tesla FSD differently and then I exchange DTSI and compatibles?
>
> You are no describing real problem and both binding and your
> explanations are vague and imprecise. Binding tells nothing about it, so
> it is example of skipping important decisions.
>
> > have 2 different SW PHY initialization sequence depending on the instance
> > number. Do you think having different compatible (something like
> > tesla,fsd-pcie-phy0 and tesla,fsd-pcie-phy1) and having phy ID as platform data
> > is okay in this case? I actually took reference from files like:
>
> And in different use case on same soc you are going to reverse
> compatibles or instance IDs?
>
Even though both the PHYs are exactly identical in terms of hardware,
they need to be programmed/initialized/configured differently.
Sorry for my misuse of the word "use-case". To clarify, these configurations
will always remain the same for FSD SoC even if you use it differently.
I will use different compatibles for them as I understand that it is the best
option.
> > drivers/usb/phy/phy-am335x-control.c
>
> So you took 15 years old hardware, code and binding as an example.
>
> No, don't do that ever.
>
> Anyway, poor choices even in newer code should not drive your design.
> Design it properly, describe the hardware.
>
> > drivers/phy/freescale/phy-fsl-imx8-mipi-dphy.c
> > who use alias to differentiate between register offsets for instances.
>
>
>
> Best regards,
> Krzysztof
Powered by blists - more mailing lists