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: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

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

Message-ID: <DFGMAGLHN1X7.2Y4CBP7MJZD6D@ti.com>
Date: Mon, 5 Jan 2026 16:56:10 +0530
From: Anshul Dalal <anshuld@...com>
To: Nishanth Menon <nm@...com>, Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@...nel.org>
CC: Anshul Dalal <anshuld@...com>, 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 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.