linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] dt-bindings: arm: cpus: Deprecate Qualcomm generic compatibles

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: <7d297b3c-555e-40aa-b7a3-921a16c11a7f@oss.qualcomm.com>
Date: Thu, 15 Jan 2026 10:45:34 +0100
From: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@....qualcomm.com>
To: Dmitry Baryshkov <dmitry.baryshkov@....qualcomm.com>
Cc: Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>, Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk+dt@...nel.org>,
        Conor Dooley <conor+dt@...nel.org>,
        Lorenzo Pieralisi
 <lpieralisi@...nel.org>, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Bjorn Andersson <andersson@...nel.org>,
        Konrad Dybcio <konradybcio@...nel.org>, linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] dt-bindings: arm: cpus: Deprecate Qualcomm generic
 compatibles

On 15/01/2026 10:36, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 15, 2026 at 09:35:04AM +0100, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>> Move four compatibles for Qualcomm Krait, Kryo, Oryon and Scorpion
>> custom CPU cores out of the enum into separate one with deprecated: true
>> annotation, because these are too generic names.
>>
>> These are names of the families and there are significant differences
>> within individual processors, e.g. Kryo6xx can based on architectures
>> from Cortex-X2, A710, A510 to A78 and probably more.
>>
>> Just like other vendor processors are differentiated, also Qualcomm CPUs
>> should come with specific compatibles.
>>
>> Cc: Bjorn Andersson <andersson@...nel.org>
>> Cc: Konrad Dybcio <konradybcio@...nel.org>
>> Cc: linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org
>> Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@....qualcomm.com>
>> ---
>>  .../devicetree/bindings/arm/cpus.yaml         | 290 +++++++++---------
>>  1 file changed, 147 insertions(+), 143 deletions(-)
>>
>> +      - enum:
>> +          - qcom,krait
>> +          - qcom,kryo
>> +          - qcom,oryon
>> +          - qcom,scorpion
>> +        # Too generic, do not use in new code
>> +        deprecated: true
> 
> I wouldn't even question Kryo and Oryon, it's obvious (or at least I
> have an idea) what should be used for those cores. Except that "Kryo"
> was an external name for MSM8996 cores. But for Krait and Scorpion I
> really have doubts and questions.

Look for "Snapdragon CPU ID" doc in internal Confluence. There are also
few more docs listing all these. Quickly looking I could not find the
actual differences in capabilities (it might need comparing each CPU),
but processes, internal codenames, tech differ between Kraits.

Whether these differences are big enough (e.g. different instruction
set?)... I am open for suggestions.

> 
> For Scorpio I'd have a vague idea of having qcom,scorpion and
> qcom,scorpion-mp (or -uni and -mp if you dislike the bare scorpion).
> 
> For Krait...  I really don't know. Your proposals?
> 

krait-codename :) (not sure if it is public)
or krait-modelname
or krait-midr-value (the one for dual/quad part, so MIDR[9:8]).

But honestly I could defer naming to future contributions. I propose
only to have argument in stopping using these names all over.


Best regards,
Krzysztof