linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 06/10] dt-bindings: clock: airoha: Document new property airoha,chip-scu

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: <687e8fb4.050a0220.1055b2.040b@mx.google.com>
Date: Mon, 21 Jul 2025 21:06:26 +0200
From: Christian Marangi <ansuelsmth@...il.com>
To: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@...nel.org>
Cc: Michael Turquette <mturquette@...libre.com>,
	Stephen Boyd <sboyd@...nel.org>, Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>,
	Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk+dt@...nel.org>,
	Conor Dooley <conor+dt@...nel.org>,
	Philipp Zabel <p.zabel@...gutronix.de>,
	Felix Fietkau <nbd@....name>, linux-clk@...r.kernel.org,
	devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 06/10] dt-bindings: clock: airoha: Document new
 property airoha,chip-scu

On Wed, Jul 16, 2025 at 04:29:12PM +0200, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> On 27/06/2025 10:20, Christian Marangi wrote:
> > 
> > Here the current DTS [1]. Nothing is stable for this and we can change
> > it but I want to stress that the current HW block are VERY CONFUSING and
> > SCRAMBELED. So it's really a matter of finding the least bad solution.
> > 
> > In SCU there are:
> > - PART fot the clock register
> > - 2 MDIO controller register
> > 
> > In chip SCU:
> > - Other part of the clock register
> > - Thermal driver register
> > - PART of the pinctrl register
> > 
> > [1] https://github.com/Ansuel/openwrt/blob/openwrt-24.10-airoha-an7581-stable/target/linux/airoha/dts/an7583.dtsi#L361
> 
> 
> Thanks and it proves: that's a no. You cannot have two devices with same
> unit address. It means that chip-scu and scu ARE THE SAME devices.
> 

Thanks for checking it. Hope it's clear that

scuclk: system-controller@...20000

is a typo and should be

scuclk: system-controller@...00000
(to follow the reg property reg = <0x0 0x1fb00000 0x0 0x970>;
 with the 0x970 taken from the documentation)

With this in mind and if your comment still apply do you have any hint
how to better reorganize the 2 node?

-- 
	Ansuel