linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/3] cpufreq: ti: Allow all silicon revisions to support OPPs

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: <20250822065510.3vlbjwakt7ts75gk@vireshk-i7>
Date: Fri, 22 Aug 2025 12:25:10 +0530
From: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>
To: Judith Mendez <jm@...com>
Cc: Nishanth Menon <nm@...com>, Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk+dt@...nel.org>,
	Vignesh Raghavendra <vigneshr@...com>,
	Tero Kristo <kristo@...nel.org>, Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>,
	Conor Dooley <conor+dt@...nel.org>,
	"Rafael J . Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>,
	Bryan Brattlof <bb@...com>, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
	devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-pm@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] cpufreq: ti: Allow all silicon revisions to support
 OPPs

On 18-08-25, 14:26, Judith Mendez wrote:
> More silicon revisions are being defined for AM62x, AM62Px, and AM62ax
> SoCs. These silicon may also support currently establishes OPPs, so remove
> the revision limitation in ti-cpufreq and thus determine if an OPP applies
> with speed grade efuse parsing.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Judith Mendez <jm@...com>
> ---
>  drivers/cpufreq/ti-cpufreq.c | 6 +++---
>  1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/ti-cpufreq.c b/drivers/cpufreq/ti-cpufreq.c
> index f7be09dc63e3..90c896d02649 100644
> --- a/drivers/cpufreq/ti-cpufreq.c
> +++ b/drivers/cpufreq/ti-cpufreq.c
> @@ -311,9 +311,9 @@ static struct ti_cpufreq_soc_data am3517_soc_data = {
>  };
>  
>  static const struct soc_device_attribute k3_cpufreq_soc[] = {
> -	{ .family = "AM62X", .revision = "SR1.0" },
> -	{ .family = "AM62AX", .revision = "SR1.0" },
> -	{ .family = "AM62PX", .revision = "SR1.0" },
> +	{ .family = "AM62X", },
> +	{ .family = "AM62AX", },
> +	{ .family = "AM62PX", },
>  	{ /* sentinel */ }
>  };

This got a minor conflict, fixed it as:

diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/ti-cpufreq.c b/drivers/cpufreq/ti-cpufreq.c
index d6bd0d2dcf15..6ee76f5fe9c5 100644
--- a/drivers/cpufreq/ti-cpufreq.c
+++ b/drivers/cpufreq/ti-cpufreq.c
@@ -311,10 +311,10 @@ static struct ti_cpufreq_soc_data am3517_soc_data = {
 };

 static const struct soc_device_attribute k3_cpufreq_soc[] = {
-       { .family = "AM62X", .revision = "SR1.0" },
-       { .family = "AM62AX", .revision = "SR1.0" },
-       { .family = "AM62PX", .revision = "SR1.0" },
-       { .family = "AM62DX", .revision = "SR1.0" },
+       { .family = "AM62X", },
+       { .family = "AM62AX", },
+       { .family = "AM62PX", },
+       { .family = "AM62DX", },
        { /* sentinel */ }

-- 
viresh