From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 30F85C433FE for ; Wed, 2 Nov 2022 17:04:19 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S230426AbiKBRES (ORCPT ); Wed, 2 Nov 2022 13:04:18 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:33192 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S229591AbiKBREP (ORCPT ); Wed, 2 Nov 2022 13:04:15 -0400 Received: from fllv0015.ext.ti.com (fllv0015.ext.ti.com [198.47.19.141]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id F145911A32; Wed, 2 Nov 2022 10:04:14 -0700 (PDT) Received: from lelv0266.itg.ti.com ([10.180.67.225]) by fllv0015.ext.ti.com (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTP id 2A2H469x093702; Wed, 2 Nov 2022 12:04:06 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=ti.com; s=ti-com-17Q1; t=1667408646; bh=rl4c4YwFqiQVdsamqsJtbq5KyzgRfRYaj2DX1UVoJmU=; h=Date:Subject:To:CC:References:From:In-Reply-To; b=l2B/1W2SoTmechaDRa5Idx+/k4Xc2NBSKcD+X22Oe+If1ZOSc8Z2wvaXqE4UKb0q5 YwExipL20RjTAIGkWMUFH7G7txM3orCKHwdfIx/DD+RN0HiBSGUxe4b7YNnF7iL/x/ AX3Esh54tuOSnuiIxjCBF6pQEUt6PhQma4UQIvJw= Received: from DLEE103.ent.ti.com (dlee103.ent.ti.com [157.170.170.33]) by lelv0266.itg.ti.com (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTPS id 2A2H46QH080418 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=FAIL); Wed, 2 Nov 2022 12:04:06 -0500 Received: from DLEE113.ent.ti.com (157.170.170.24) by DLEE103.ent.ti.com (157.170.170.33) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_CBC_SHA256_P256) id 15.1.2507.6; Wed, 2 Nov 2022 12:04:06 -0500 Received: from fllv0040.itg.ti.com (10.64.41.20) by DLEE113.ent.ti.com (157.170.170.24) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_CBC_SHA256_P256) id 15.1.2507.6 via Frontend Transport; Wed, 2 Nov 2022 12:04:06 -0500 Received: from [10.249.33.217] (ileaxei01-snat2.itg.ti.com [10.180.69.6]) by fllv0040.itg.ti.com (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTP id 2A2H45Pj118344; Wed, 2 Nov 2022 12:04:05 -0500 Message-ID: <4f954c08-6a2e-93b5-6806-7b27b247496e@ti.com> Date: Wed, 2 Nov 2022 12:04:04 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/102.2.2 Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] arm64: dts: ti: k3-am65-main: drop RNG clock Content-Language: en-US To: Nishanth Menon , Jayesh Choudhary CC: , , , , , , , , References: <20221031213237.52275-1-j-choudhary@ti.com> <20221031213237.52275-2-j-choudhary@ti.com> <20221102151706.krsi5lujydb4nswa@daybreak> From: Andrew Davis In-Reply-To: <20221102151706.krsi5lujydb4nswa@daybreak> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-EXCLAIMER-MD-CONFIG: e1e8a2fd-e40a-4ac6-ac9b-f7e9cc9ee180 Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 11/2/22 10:17 AM, Nishanth Menon wrote: > On 03:02-20221101, Jayesh Choudhary wrote: >> Drop RNG clock property as it is not controlled by rng-driver. > > Does'nt tell me what is the alternative? why is the hardware description > not sufficient for control? > > https://software-dl.ti.com/tisci/esd/latest/5_soc_doc/am65x_sr2/clocks.html#clocks-for-sa2-ul0-device > Looks like a perfectly valid description - do we have a bug and firmware > does'nt allow control here? > We have three input clocks feeding the SA2UL module, x1, x2, pka. PKA goes to the PKA sub-module (isn't it nice when they make things simple). But x1 and x2 are miscellaneous and bus clocks respectively and route to several sub-modules. All we drop here is the clock handle in the RNG sub-module, as that sub-module is not the owner of that clock (the parent SA2UL is). The alternative we could implement is to move the clock node up to the parent SA2UL node. >> >> Fixes: b366b2409c97 ("arm64: dts: ti: k3-am6: Add crypto accelarator node") >> Signed-off-by: Jayesh Choudhary >> --- >> arch/arm64/boot/dts/ti/k3-am65-main.dtsi | 1 - >> 1 file changed, 1 deletion(-) >> >> diff --git a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/ti/k3-am65-main.dtsi b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/ti/k3-am65-main.dtsi >> index 4005a73cfea9..e166d7b7e3a1 100644 >> --- a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/ti/k3-am65-main.dtsi >> +++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/ti/k3-am65-main.dtsi >> @@ -126,7 +126,6 @@ rng: rng@4e10000 { >> compatible = "inside-secure,safexcel-eip76"; >> reg = <0x0 0x4e10000 0x0 0x7d>; >> interrupts = ; >> - clocks = <&k3_clks 136 1>; > > Does this mean that the crypto module's power-domains property should be > dropped as well? > Why? the power-domains property is in the correct spot (up in the parent node). Now it is true we cant actually shut the SA2UL down since it is owned by the security processor, but since it is marked TI_SCI_PD_SHARED this should be fine. Andrew >> status = "disabled"; /* Used by OP-TEE */ >> }; >> }; >> -- >> 2.25.1 >> >