linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 3/8] drm/panthor: Introduce panthor

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: <4cea5fa2-83da-4620-aa4a-97a6378f62f8@arm.com>
Date: Mon, 27 Oct 2025 10:36:13 +0000
From: Karunika Choo <karunika.choo@....com>
To: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@...labora.com>
Cc: dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org, nd@....com,
 Steven Price <steven.price@....com>, Liviu Dudau <liviu.dudau@....com>,
 Maarten Lankhorst <maarten.lankhorst@...ux.intel.com>,
 Maxime Ripard <mripard@...nel.org>, Thomas Zimmermann <tzimmermann@...e.de>,
 David Airlie <airlied@...il.com>, Simona Vetter <simona@...ll.ch>,
 linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 3/8] drm/panthor: Introduce panthor_pwr API and power
 control framework

On 26/10/2025 08:13, Boris Brezillon wrote:
> On Fri, 24 Oct 2025 21:21:12 +0100
> Karunika Choo <karunika.choo@....com> wrote:
>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/panthor/panthor_hw.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/panthor/panthor_hw.c
>> index 092962db5ccd..09aef34a6ce7 100644
>> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/panthor/panthor_hw.c
>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/panthor/panthor_hw.c
>> @@ -192,3 +192,8 @@ int panthor_hw_init(struct panthor_device *ptdev)
>>
>>  	return 0;
>>  }
>> +
>> +bool panthor_hw_has_pwr_ctrl(struct panthor_device *ptdev)
>> +{
>> +	return GPU_ARCH_MAJOR(ptdev->gpu_info.gpu_id) >= 14;
>> +}
>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/panthor/panthor_hw.h b/drivers/gpu/drm/panthor/panthor_hw.h
>> index 2665d6dde2e3..4c71f27d1c0b 100644
>> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/panthor/panthor_hw.h
>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/panthor/panthor_hw.h
>> @@ -32,4 +32,6 @@ struct panthor_hw {
>>
>>  int panthor_hw_init(struct panthor_device *ptdev);
>>
>> +bool panthor_hw_has_pwr_ctrl(struct panthor_device *ptdev);
> 
> Let's make this a static inline function so the compiler can inline its
> content at compile time.
> 

I wonder if making it static inline is a good idea. We will need to move
this function into panthor_device.h to be able to do so as we need to
access the panthor_device structure. Would this still be desirable?