linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 2/3] soc: qcom: llcc: Fix usecase id macro alignment

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: <7158bde2-bf70-4a2d-b19f-fcc24cc37d28@oss.qualcomm.com>
Date: Wed, 26 Nov 2025 17:08:35 +0530
From: Pankaj Patil <pankaj.patil@....qualcomm.com>
To: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@...nel.org>
Cc: Bjorn Andersson <andersson@...nel.org>,
        Konrad Dybcio <konradybcio@...nel.org>,
        Conor Dooley <conor@...nel.org>,
        Jonathan Cameron <jonathan.cameron@...wei.com>,
        Rob Herring
 <robh@...nel.org>,
        Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk+dt@...nel.org>,
        linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/3] soc: qcom: llcc: Fix usecase id macro alignment

On 11/26/2025 2:29 PM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 25, 2025 at 02:46:23PM +0530, Pankaj Patil wrote:
>> Aligned macro values for usecase id along the column length
>> -#define LLCC_CAMOFE	 71
>> -#define LLCC_CAMRTIP	 72
>> -#define LLCC_CAMSRTIP	 73
>> -#define LLCC_CAMRTRF	 74
>> -#define LLCC_CAMSRTRF	 75
>> -#define LLCC_VIDEO_APV	 83
>> -#define LLCC_COMPUTE1	 87
>> -#define LLCC_CPUSS_OPP	 88
>> -#define LLCC_CPUSSMPAM	 89
>> -#define LLCC_CAM_IPE_STROV	 92
>> -#define LLCC_CAM_OFE_STROV	 93
>> -#define LLCC_CPUSS_HEU	 94
>> -#define LLCC_MDM_PNG_FIXED	 100
>> +#define LLCC_CPUSS         1
>> +#define LLCC_VIDSC0        2
>> +#define LLCC_VIDSC1        3
>> +#define LLCC_ROTATOR       4
>> +#define LLCC_VOICE         5
> This does not look right - you still have here spaces, so nothing fixed.
>
> I don't think this change is useful. You replaced one poor alignment
> into another poor alignment, so IMO better not to touch this at all.
>
> Best regards,
> Krzysztof
>
Sure, Will drop this patch in next revision