linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] dt-bindings: mailbox: qcom: Add IPCC support for Kaanapali 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: <cdfde03c-0fa1-4142-87b6-7c023e0b5c0d@kernel.org>
Date: Wed, 29 Oct 2025 16:47:17 +0100
From: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@...nel.org>
To: Bjorn Andersson <andersson@...nel.org>,
 Jingyi Wang <jingyi.wang@....qualcomm.com>
Cc: Manivannan Sadhasivam <mani@...nel.org>,
 Jassi Brar <jassisinghbrar@...il.com>, Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>,
 Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk+dt@...nel.org>, Conor Dooley
 <conor+dt@...nel.org>, aiqun.yu@....qualcomm.com,
 tingwei.zhang@....qualcomm.com, trilok.soni@....qualcomm.com,
 yijie.yang@....qualcomm.com, linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org,
 linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] dt-bindings: mailbox: qcom: Add IPCC support for
 Kaanapali Platform

On 29/10/2025 16:16, Bjorn Andersson wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 29, 2025 at 01:15:09AM -0700, Jingyi Wang wrote:
>> Add the physical client ids and binding for Kaanapali platform. Physical
>> client IDs instead of virtual client IDs are used for qcom new platforms
>> in the Inter Process Communication Controller (IPCC) driver as virtual to
>> physical mapping logic is removed in HW.
> 
> Happy to see the description of what changed wrt physical vs virtual
> client IDs, but you're leaving the task of figuring out how this
> explanation is applicable to the imagination of the reader.
> 
> Nobody knows that the values in dt-bindings/mailbox/qcom-ipcc.h are
> "virtual client IDs", so it's not clear that you're trying to provide an
> explanation to why a new, platform-specific, header file is needed here.
> 
> 


Physical or virtual, standard expectation is that they are used by the
driver. This does not happen here, so what do they exactly represent?
Which part of SW ABI?

Best regards,
Krzysztof