Hi Bhupesh, On 2/9/23 14:21, Bhupesh Sharma wrote:
Hi Vladimir, On 2/9/23 12:07 AM, Vladimir Zapolskiy wrote:Add description of QCE and its corresponding BAM DMA IPs on SM8250 SoC. Signed-off-by: Vladimir Zapolskiy <vladimir.zapolskiy@xxxxxxxxxx> --- arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sm8250.dtsi | 24 ++++++++++++++++++++++++ 1 file changed, 24 insertions(+) diff --git a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sm8250.dtsi b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sm8250.dtsi index e59c16f74d17..d8698d18223e 100644 --- a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sm8250.dtsi +++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sm8250.dtsi @@ -2215,6 +2215,30 @@ ufs_mem_phy_lanes: phy@1d87400 { }; };+ cryptobam: dma-controller@1dc4000 {+ compatible = "qcom,bam-v1.7.0"; + reg = <0x0 0x01dc4000 0x0 0x24000>; + interrupts = <GIC_SPI 272 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>; + #dma-cells = <1>; + qcom,ee = <0>; + qcom,controlled-remotely; + num-channels = <8>; + qcom,num-ees = <2>; + iommus = <&apps_smmu 0x586 0x11>, + <&apps_smmu 0x596 0x11>; + }; + + crypto: crypto@1dfa000 { + compatible = "qcom,sm8250-qce", "qcom,sm8150-qce"; + reg = <0x0 0x01dfa000 0x0 0x6000>; + dmas = <&cryptobam 6>, <&cryptobam 7>; + dma-names = "rx", "tx"; + interconnects = <&aggre2_noc MASTER_CRYPTO_CORE_0 &mc_virt SLAVE_EBI_CH0>; + interconnect-names = "memory"; + iommus = <&apps_smmu 0x586 0x11>, + <&apps_smmu 0x596 0x11>; + }; + tcsr_mutex: hwlock@1f40000 { compatible = "qcom,tcsr-mutex"; reg = <0x0 0x01f40000 0x0 0x40000>;This patch was part of the v7 arm64 dts fixes I sent out - see [1].
thank you for pointing it out, so there are two different v7 series of related patches, as it's stated in the cover letter I based my v8 on top of linux-crypto changes [*], and this particular change was developed independently from yours. And so, there are some differences, can you please comment on them? - My change does not have 'interconnects' property under dma-controller@1dc4000 device tree node, I believe it is not needed, but please correct me here. - My change uses DMA channel number taken from the downstream code [**], is there a reason to use different ones like in your change? - My change has a shorter list of IOMMUs also copied from the same downstream code, is there a reason to use a different extended list like in your change? - On my end I have to retest your change without 'num-channels' and 'qcom,num-ees' properties, since this also seems as an important difference between two patches. Nevertheless, thank you again for bringing my attention to a different patch series, I'll reuse the changes from it, and also publish all of them together and in a separate changeset as Krzysztof suggested.
Probably you can use it as a base and make the changes (interconnect property for the BAM DMA node and qce-compatible names) directly there and include it in your patch series.
[*] https://lore.kernel.org/linux-arm-msm/20220920114051.1116441-1-bhupesh.sharma@xxxxxxxxxx/ [**] https://source.codeaurora.org/quic/la/kernel/msm-4.19/tree/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/kona.dtsi?h=LA.UM.8.12.3.1&id=f3dd4aaeb34438c877ccd42f5a48ccd554dd765a#n2979
[1]. https://lore.kernel.org/linux-arm-msm/20220921045602.1462007-3-bhupesh.sharma@xxxxxxxxxx/
-- Best wishes, Vladimir
