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: <l6ja2uni4grnhicis3xksmco65l5axodwg6umpomhkssuc4ja5@zy33evwbv3zy>
Date: Wed, 29 Oct 2025 11:15:24 -0500
From: Bjorn Andersson <andersson@...nel.org>
To: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@...nel.org>
Cc: Jingyi Wang <jingyi.wang@....qualcomm.com>, 
	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 Wed, Oct 29, 2025 at 04:47:17PM +0100, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> 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?
> 

I was under the impression that they would be used only in DeviceTree
source, and the driver simply uses the values it reads at runtime.

But perhaps my memory is failing me, it's been a while since we
discussed this internally. Either way, the commit message should
document this, so I don't have to remember...

Regards,
Bjorn

> Best regards,
> Krzysztof

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ