linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v6] dt-bindings: arm: keystone: add boot

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20260105145411.6ybff7i2s4wz3lsc@prorate>
Date: Mon, 5 Jan 2026 08:54:11 -0600
From: Nishanth Menon <nm@...com>
To: Anshul Dalal <anshuld@...com>
CC: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@...nel.org>, Tero Kristo <kristo@...nel.org>,
	Santosh Shilimkar <ssantosh@...nel.org>, Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>,
	Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk+dt@...nel.org>, Conor Dooley <conor+dt@...nel.org>,
	Andrew Davis <afd@...com>, <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
	<devicetree@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, "Vignesh
 Raghavendra" <vigneshr@...com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6] dt-bindings: arm: keystone: add boot_* mboxes to
 ti,sci

On 16:56-20260105, Anshul Dalal wrote:
> On Mon Dec 29, 2025 at 11:16 PM IST, Nishanth Menon wrote:
> > Anshul,
> >
> > On 14:40-20251223, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> >> On 23/12/2025 09:44, Anshul Dalal wrote:
> >> > On Mon Dec 22, 2025 at 2:23 PM IST, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> >> >> On 22/12/2025 09:43, Anshul Dalal wrote:
> >> >>> The bootloader on K3 devices makes use of mailboxes as per the ROM spec
> >> >>> which might be different than one's available to the kernel (firmware
> >> >>> spec).
> >> >>>
> >> >>> Therefore, this patch adds the missing mailbox entries to the DT binding
> >> >>> if the matching compatible is ti,am654-sci to represent the mailboxes
> >> >>> exposed by the hardware during boot for the purpose of loading the
> >> >>> firmware.
> >> >>>
> >> >>> The new ti,am642-sci compatible is also added to represent SoCs which do
> >> >>> not expose a "notify" channel as part of their TI-SCI spec such as AM64x
> >> >>> or the AM62 family. The newly added mboxes are made optional by keeping
> >> >>> minItems as 2 to remain compliant with existing device-trees.
> >> >>>
> >> >>> Signed-off-by: Anshul Dalal <anshuld@...com>
> >> >>> ---
> >> >>> Changes in v6:
> >> >>> - Added ti,am642-sci compatible to represent SoCs without a "notify" channel
> >> >>> - Added new examples instead of editing existing ones
> >> >>
> >> >> Why? Rob asked not to.
> >> > 
> >> > I had followed what Nishanth had said[1], I'll wait for him and Rob to
> >> > align first before posting the next revision.
> >> 
> >> 
> >> Existing examples are fine. There is no rule saying you need to keep
> >> updating examples or keep adding new device to examples. If someone told
> >> you about such rule, tell them to stop inventing rules...
> >
> > As I had responded to Rob (the reference you posted), leave the
> > existing example in the binding as is, we do not need to add new
> > examples either for each of the compatibles. We have enough examples
> > in device tree now. So, IMHO, just update the binding.
> 
> That makes sense, I will remove the new examples in the next revision.
> 
> Though should we add the new am642-sci compatible as well or just
> re-order the one for ti,am654-sci to ensure we can handle the AM64's
> edge case?  Since, the added compatible makes the if-else chain more
> complicated than it needs to be.

I believe Krystoff already suggested the same.

https://lore.kernel.org/all/1844147d-543d-4739-a1ec-a59f8a4564fb@kernel.org/
"
Move the notify to the end, so you have only one common list defined at
the top and you only change number of items per variant."

-- 
Regards,
Nishanth Menon
Key (0xDDB5849D1736249D) / Fingerprint: F8A2 8693 54EB 8232 17A3  1A34 DDB5 849D 1736 249D
https://ti.com/opensource