On 3/17/21 9:20 AM, Bhupesh Sharma wrote:
> Hi Rob,
>
> Thanks for your review.
>
> On Wed, 17 Mar 2021 at 03:58, Rob Herring <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, Mar 10, 2021 at 10:54:57AM +0530, Bhupesh Sharma wrote:
>>> Newer qcom chips support newer versions of the qce IP, so add
>>> new compatible strings for qcom-qce (in addition to the existing
>>> "qcom,crypto-v5.1").
>>>
>>> With [1], Thara tried to add the support for new compatible strings,
>>> but we couldn't conclude on the approach to be used. Since we have
>>> a number of new qcom arm64 SoCs available now, several of which
>>> support the same crypto IP version, so it makes more sense to use
>>> the IP version for the compatible string, rather than using the soc
>>> name as the compatible string.
>>>
>>> [1]. https://lore.kernel.org/linux-arm-msm/[email protected]/
>>>
>>> Cc: Thara Gopinath <[email protected]>
>>> Cc: Bjorn Andersson <[email protected]>
>>> Cc: Rob Herring <[email protected]>
>>> Cc: Andy Gross <[email protected]>
>>> Cc: Herbert Xu <[email protected]>
>>> Cc: David S. Miller <[email protected]>
>>> Cc: Stephen Boyd <[email protected]>
>>> Cc: Michael Turquette <[email protected]>
>>> Cc: [email protected]
>>> Cc: [email protected]
>>> Cc: [email protected]
>>> Cc: [email protected]
>>> Cc: [email protected]
>>> Signed-off-by: Bhupesh Sharma <[email protected]>
>>> ---
>>> Documentation/devicetree/bindings/crypto/qcom-qce.txt | 6 +++++-
>>> 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/crypto/qcom-qce.txt b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/crypto/qcom-qce.txt
>>> index 07ee1b12000b..217b37dbd58a 100644
>>> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/crypto/qcom-qce.txt
>>> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/crypto/qcom-qce.txt
>>> @@ -2,7 +2,11 @@ Qualcomm crypto engine driver
>>>
>>> Required properties:
>>>
>>> -- compatible : should be "qcom,crypto-v5.1"
>>> +- compatible : Supported versions are:
>>> + - "qcom,crypto-v5.1", for ipq6018
>>> + - "qcom,crypto-v5.4", for sdm845, sm8150
>>
>> 2 SoCs sharing 1 version doesn't convince me on using version numbers.
>> Having 4 versions for 5 SoCs further convinces me you should stick with
>> SoC specific compatibles as *everyone* else does (including most QCom
>> bindings).
Hi!
So, it is 2 SoCs today. But we do have a bunch of SoCs for each version
and these could be added in future. I think I have asked this question
before as well,how about "qcom,sdm845-crypto", "qcom,crypto-v5.4" and
have only "qcom,crypto-<version>" in the driver ? I see this being done
by some Qcom bindings.
> Fair enough. I will add SoC specific compatibles in v2, which should
> be out shortly.
>
> Regards,
> Bhupesh
>
>>> + - "qcom,crypto-v5.5", for sm8250
>>> + - "qcom,crypto-v5.6", for sm8350
>>> - reg : specifies base physical address and size of the registers map
>>> - clocks : phandle to clock-controller plus clock-specifier pair
>>> - clock-names : "iface" clocks register interface
>>> --
>>> 2.29.2
>>>
--
Warm Regards
Thara