linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v1 2/3] arm64: dts: ti: Add Aquila AM69 Support

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: <20251106150309.GA44898@francesco-nb>
Date: Thu, 6 Nov 2025 16:03:09 +0100
From: Francesco Dolcini <francesco@...cini.it>
To: Andrew Davis <afd@...com>
Cc: Francesco Dolcini <francesco@...cini.it>, Nishanth Menon <nm@...com>,
	Vignesh Raghavendra <vigneshr@...com>,
	Tero Kristo <kristo@...nel.org>, Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>,
	Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk+dt@...nel.org>,
	Conor Dooley <conor+dt@...nel.org>,
	Parth Pancholi <parth.pancholi@...adex.com>,
	linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Emanuele Ghidoli <emanuele.ghidoli@...adex.com>,
	Ernest Van Hoecke <ernest.vanhoecke@...adex.com>,
	João Paulo Gonçalves <joao.goncalves@...adex.com>,
	Francesco Dolcini <francesco.dolcini@...adex.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 2/3] arm64: dts: ti: Add Aquila AM69 Support

Hello Andrew,

On Thu, Nov 06, 2025 at 07:32:44AM -0600, Andrew Davis wrote:
> On 11/6/25 4:19 AM, Francesco Dolcini wrote:
> > On Wed, Nov 05, 2025 at 02:01:35PM -0600, Andrew Davis wrote:
> > > On 11/5/25 5:53 AM, Francesco Dolcini wrote:
> > > > On Tue, Nov 04, 2025 at 11:41:54AM -0600, Andrew Davis wrote:
> > > > > On 11/4/25 8:52 AM, Francesco Dolcini wrote:

...

> > > > > > +/* Aquila SPI_1 */
> > > > > > +&main_spi2 {
> > > > > > +	pinctrl-names = "default";
> > > > > > +	pinctrl-0 = <&pinctrl_main_spi2>, <&pinctrl_main_spi2_cs0>;
> > > > > > +	status = "disabled";
> > > > > 
> > > > > This is already disabled by default in the SoC dtsi file.
> > > > 
> > > > Yes, known. Is this an issue?
> > > > 
> > > > This node must be disabled, no matter what is present in any included
> > > > dtsi file, it's a deliberate decision.
> > > > 
> > > > This dtsi file describes a SoM, the used pins/functions are defined on
> > > > the pinout, but this node cannot be enabled unless the SoM is mated with
> > > > a carrier board that is exposing it.
> > > 
> > > Same as my point above, you shouldn't enable nodes that are not used
> > > or have anything attached. The SoM only has some edge connectors so
> > > it should not be enabled at the SoM level, that we seem to agree, but
> > > the carrier board doesn't connect those lines to anything either. They
> > > just run to a pin header with nothing attached, how is that header
> > > any different than the pins on the edge of the SoM?
> > 
> > You are commenting something unrelated here, or I am not understanding
> > you.
> 
> Yes this was a bit of a tangent to the comment above. The point here
> was more on the pinmux, as a new carrier board might use these pins
> for something other than SPI, the pinmuxing shouldn't be done at the
> SoM dtsi level. Instead do it at the point the node is connected to
> some hardware on the carrier board in its DTS.

Our SoM implements a specific pinout, with well defined functions,
therefore the functionality of the pin is defined at the SoM level [1].

[1] https://docs1.toradex.com/116801-aquila_family_specification.pdf
	  page 13, 14, 15


Francesco