linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 3/3] arm64: dts: qcom: Add missing TCSR refclk to the DP PHYs

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <qlqsefvnibw4esm5wz7khmyfdnszn5veinfb3k2w67f5v73kry@rzclmu57ybdh>
Date: Thu, 4 Sep 2025 11:52:26 +0300
From: Abel Vesa <abel.vesa@...aro.org>
To: Konrad Dybcio <konrad.dybcio@....qualcomm.com>
Cc: Vinod Koul <vkoul@...nel.org>, 
	Kishon Vijay Abraham I <kishon@...nel.org>, Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>, 
	Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk+dt@...nel.org>, Conor Dooley <conor+dt@...nel.org>, 
	Bjorn Andersson <andersson@...nel.org>, Dmitry Baryshkov <lumag@...nel.org>, 
	Konrad Dybcio <konradybcio@...nel.org>, Sibi Sankar <quic_sibis@...cinc.com>, 
	Rajendra Nayak <quic_rjendra@...cinc.com>, Johan Hovold <johan@...nel.org>, 
	Taniya Das <quic_tdas@...cinc.com>, Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@...aro.org>, 
	linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org, linux-phy@...ts.infradead.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org, 
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, stable@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 3/3] arm64: dts: qcom: Add missing TCSR refclk to the
 DP PHYs

On 25-09-04 10:40:36, Konrad Dybcio wrote:
> On 9/3/25 2:37 PM, Abel Vesa wrote:
> > The DP PHYs on X1E80100 need the refclk which is provided
> > by the TCSR CC. So add it to the PHYs.
> > 
> > Cc: stable@...r.kernel.org # v6.9
> 
> You want to backport this to 6.9, but you also want to backport
> the driver patch to 6.10, "meh"
> 
> I'm not sure it makes sense to backport functionally, as this would
> only exhibit issues if:
> 
> a) the UEFI did no work to enable the refclk
> or:
> b) unused cleanup would happen
> 
> but the board would not survive booting with b) in v6.9, at least
> it wouldn't have display  - see Commit b60521eff227 ("clk: qcom:
> gcc-x1e80100: Unregister GCC_GPU_CFG_AHB_CLK/GCC_DISP_XO_CLK")
> 
> and a) is not something we'd hit on any of the upstream-supported
> targets

You are correct.

However, HW-wise, this clock is there and is needed, regardless
if UEFI leaves it enabled or not. So it makes sense to go all the way
back to 6.9 and fix it.