From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (aws-us-west-2-korg-mail-1.web.codeaurora.org [10.30.226.201]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 26ED128FD; Tue, 18 Mar 2025 15:40:58 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1742312459; cv=none; b=LjrugoYeDZ5PTDn1sLFeD9KIFfsMuT+sVLnzTT4rCDAaSIYXG9iyTOkBIT5/fgr3gm89OecnqQITHAl8P18rxhqh/QqmuWb9eaN7fJ7fO939j/mX5VMhykY2gIgkP91Ky51ai3r9cpnu7yBtdBG2cjSbU3nuW9ydE3fzNZyWW/s= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1742312459; c=relaxed/simple; bh=8XU+uzlDIVHp8KPdPZ+SQ58qTW7pc8uMOtHULNZO6zY=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=pLmLFxgWWuQPgenn3iubBoo0Ah65lf1zlHhxJd9KYYpmKQ1YRZA6fKHu2QxJf95fueT+oYw3Zb3cU/gDyfg5QmISthyTGEiVQAvdYJGt4ET4zuMHdXKSxcoXDLry1B+dICUkQmJaJ6DQy3bLH9GrnbZYJQx4O/K+2q+MtKQzGXw= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b=GaRF461u; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b="GaRF461u" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 867C7C4CEDD; Tue, 18 Mar 2025 15:40:58 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1742312458; bh=8XU+uzlDIVHp8KPdPZ+SQ58qTW7pc8uMOtHULNZO6zY=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=GaRF461uLgkFESqexYg+JyYJMVoKk5NVmQR7HipojvNON3b7EmXQ/MgTOZZXIrj/n TklI1rzC65IMk6/Bh4u0wwQfRquGxxdKAqbzvqiEv1QLeU2poojlDmVtE+yK0krYag DY4pcVj6FJa9zOduwD346Hp5rLoKkgldHkPSjCSbkg1o6uFIn4Rny07ogHt0dJn4Ww NuLMpvLTwcCrmknhC2aHFplU/4nsaOR7L1TVrYhhC6KdeAgrF1m5Dq1ShyjJIlJJYZ h+LSeTYbOfu5mEQL7x5NYVGru0KQ40gOO4rSIdm0yED7zr5CHi2bNvvnnh3x0NzziO v3B0EFuEDtgBg== Received: from johan by xi.lan with local (Exim 4.97.1) (envelope-from ) id 1tuZ3q-000000006vp-47Uz; Tue, 18 Mar 2025 16:40:59 +0100 Date: Tue, 18 Mar 2025 16:40:58 +0100 From: Johan Hovold To: Cristian Marussi Cc: Dan Carpenter , Sibi Sankar , sudeep.holla@arm.com, dmitry.baryshkov@linaro.org, maz@kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, arm-scmi@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org, konradybcio@kernel.org Subject: Re: [RFC V6 2/2] firmware: arm_scmi: Add quirk to bypass SCP fw bug Message-ID: References: <20250226024338.3994701-1-quic_sibis@quicinc.com> <20250226024338.3994701-3-quic_sibis@quicinc.com> <759226e1-05aa-4ca2-b2f5-7f1a84dc427f@stanley.mountain> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: On Tue, Mar 18, 2025 at 01:29:19PM +0000, Cristian Marussi wrote: > On Tue, Mar 18, 2025 at 09:16:36AM +0100, Johan Hovold wrote: > > Have you made any progress on the quirk framework prototyping? > > I have not forgot, tried a few things, but nothing really to post as of > now...dont wnat to rush either .... I was hoping to push something out at > the end of this next merge window... > > > Do you need any input from Sibi on the protocol versioning for that? > > No I am fine, I am planning anyway for something generic enough to be > easy then to plug your own quirks separately... Sounds good, thanks. > > We'd really like to enable cpufreq on this platform and ideally in 6.15. > > I think that should be possible given that we now understand in what > > ways the firmware is broken and what is needed to handle it even if we > > still need to decide on how best to implement this. > > v6.15 seems hard/impossible even using the original Sibi patch > given the usual upstreaming-timeline of the SCMI stack where everything has > to be usually reviewed and accepted by rc4/rc5.....so both Sibi initial > patch and my own babbling were alreaady sort of late. Yes, sorry, I wasn't referring to Sibi's SCMI patches, but the devicetree changes needed to enable cpufreq on these platforms (that will go through the qcom tree). It may be a little late for that too, but with an understanding of the problem and a quirk implementation around the corner, we could enable cpufreq as long as we make sure that Sibi's per-channel FC fix (that addresses the FC warnings) is not merged without the quirk in place (to avoid the crashes). Johan