linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 3/4] arm64: dts: qcom: Add HAMOA-IOT-SOM platform

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: <aHkhcUVBnrwadKfa@linaro.org>
Date: Thu, 17 Jul 2025 18:14:41 +0200
From: Stephan Gerhold <stephan.gerhold@...aro.org>
To: Yijie Yang <yijie.yang@....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>, linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org,
	devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/4] arm64: dts: qcom: Add HAMOA-IOT-SOM platform

On Wed, Jul 16, 2025 at 05:08:41PM +0800, Yijie Yang wrote:
> The HAMOA-IOT-SOM is a compact computing module that integrates a System
> on Chip (SoC) — specifically the x1e80100 — along with essential
> components optimized for IoT applications. It is designed to be mounted on
> carrier boards, enabling the development of complete embedded systems.
> 
> This change enables and overlays the following components:
> - Regulators on the SOM
> - Reserved memory regions
> - PCIe6a and its PHY
> - PCIe4 and its PHY
> - USB0 through USB6 and their PHYs
> - ADSP, CDSP
> - WLAN, Bluetooth (M.2 interface)

There is no WLAN in here, it's part of PATCH 4/4 as far as I can tell.
Move it to changelog of PATCH 4/4?

> 
> Written with contributions from Yingying Tang (added PCIe4 and its PHY to
> enable WLAN).
> 
> Signed-off-by: Yijie Yang <yijie.yang@....qualcomm.com>
> ---
>  arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/hamoa-iot-som.dtsi | 607 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>  1 file changed, 607 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/hamoa-iot-som.dtsi b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/hamoa-iot-som.dtsi
> new file mode 100644
> index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..dad24a6a49ad370aee48a9fd8f4a46f64c2b6348
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/hamoa-iot-som.dtsi
> @@ -0,0 +1,607 @@
> [...]
> +&remoteproc_adsp {
> +	firmware-name = "qcom/hamoa-iot/adsp.mbn",
> +			"qcom/hamoa-iot/adsp_dtb.mbn";
> +
> +	status = "okay";
> +};
> +
> +&remoteproc_cdsp {
> +	firmware-name = "qcom/hamoa-iot/cdsp.mbn",
> +			"qcom/hamoa-iot/cdsp_dtb.mbn";

You say this SoM can be used to build "complete embedded systems", are
you sure they will all use the same firwmare signatures?

If not, this should be in the device-specific DT (i.e. the carrier board
in your case).

> [...]
> +&usb_1_ss0 {
> +	status = "okay";
> +};
> +
> +&usb_1_ss0_dwc3 {
> +	dr_mode = "otg";
> +	usb-role-switch;
> +};
> +
> +&usb_1_ss0_hsphy {
> +	vdd-supply = <&vreg_l3j_0p8>;
> +	vdda12-supply = <&vreg_l2j_1p2>;
> +
> +	status = "okay";
> +};
> +
> +&usb_1_ss0_qmpphy {
> +	vdda-phy-supply = <&vreg_l2j_1p2>;
> +	vdda-pll-supply = <&vreg_l1j_0p8>;
> +
> +	status = "okay";
> +};
> +
> +&usb_1_ss1 {
> +	status = "okay";
> +};
> +
> +&usb_1_ss1_dwc3 {
> +	dr_mode = "otg";
> +	usb-role-switch;
> +};
> +
> +&usb_1_ss1_hsphy {
> +	vdd-supply = <&vreg_l3j_0p8>;
> +	vdda12-supply = <&vreg_l2j_1p2>;
> +
> +	status = "okay";
> +};
> +
> +&usb_1_ss1_qmpphy {
> +	vdda-phy-supply = <&vreg_l2j_1p2>;
> +	vdda-pll-supply = <&vreg_l2d_0p9>;
> +
> +	status = "okay";
> +};
> +
> +&usb_1_ss2 {
> +	status = "okay";
> +};
> +
> +&usb_1_ss2_dwc3 {
> +	dr_mode = "otg";
> +	usb-role-switch;
> +};
> +
> +&usb_1_ss2_hsphy {
> +	vdd-supply = <&vreg_l3j_0p8>;
> +	vdda12-supply = <&vreg_l2j_1p2>;
> +
> +	status = "okay";
> +};
> +
> +&usb_1_ss2_qmpphy {
> +	vdda-phy-supply = <&vreg_l2j_1p2>;
> +	vdda-pll-supply = <&vreg_l2d_0p9>;
> +
> +	status = "okay";
> +};
> +
> +&usb_2 {
> +	status = "okay";
> +};
> +
> +&usb_2_dwc3 {
> +	dr_mode = "host";
> +};
> +
> +&usb_2_hsphy {
> +	vdd-supply = <&vreg_l2e_0p8>;
> +	vdda12-supply = <&vreg_l3e_1p2>;
> +
> +	status = "okay";
> +};
> +
> +&usb_mp {
> +	status = "okay";
> +};
> +
> +&usb_mp_hsphy0 {
> +	vdd-supply = <&vreg_l2e_0p8>;
> +	vdda12-supply = <&vreg_l3e_1p2>;
> +
> +	status = "okay";
> +};
> +
> +&usb_mp_hsphy1 {
> +	vdd-supply = <&vreg_l2e_0p8>;
> +	vdda12-supply = <&vreg_l3e_1p2>;
> +
> +	status = "okay";
> +};
> +
> +&usb_mp_qmpphy0 {
> +	vdda-phy-supply = <&vreg_l3e_1p2>;
> +	vdda-pll-supply = <&vreg_l3c_0p8>;
> +
> +	status = "okay";
> +};
> +
> +&usb_mp_qmpphy1 {
> +	vdda-phy-supply = <&vreg_l3e_1p2>;
> +	vdda-pll-supply = <&vreg_l3c_0p8>;
> +
> +	status = "okay";
> +};
> 

Assuming the USB ports are located on the carrier board and not the
SoM(?):

Are carrier boards required to make use of all these USB
ports/interfaces? In my experience it's not unusual that embedded
carrier boards use only the functionality that they need. Maybe this
should just set the common properties and enabling individual ports for
PCIe and USB should be up to the carrier boards.

Thanks,
Stephan