Re: [PATCH v6 07/11] arm64: dts: qcom: sm6115: Add Crypto Engine support

Konrad Dybcio
2023-05-19T10:42:32Z

On 19.05.2023 12:22, Bhupesh Sharma wrote:
> Hi Stephan,
>
> On Fri, 19 May 2023 at 15:40, Stephan Gerhold <stephan@gerhold.net> wrote:
>>
>> Hi Bhupesh,
>>
>> Not sure if this is the latest version of this series since it's pretty
>> old but I didn't find a new one. Just came here because you mentioned
>> RB1/RB2 [1] in my bam_dma patch and they don't have any BAM defined
>> upstream yet.
>>
>> [1]: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-arm-msm/CAH=2Ntw0BZH=RGp14mYLhX7D6jV5O5eDKRQbby=uCy85xMDU_g@mail.gmail.com/
>>
>> On Wed, Apr 05, 2023 at 12:58:32PM +0530, Bhupesh Sharma wrote:
>>> Add crypto engine (CE) and CE BAM related nodes and definitions to
>>> 'sm6115.dtsi'.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Bhupesh Sharma <bhupesh.sharma@linaro.org>
>>> ---
>>> arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sm6115.dtsi | 22 ++++++++++++++++++++++
>>> 1 file changed, 22 insertions(+)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sm6115.dtsi b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sm6115.dtsi
>>> index 2a51c938bbcb..ebac026b4cc7 100644
>>> --- a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sm6115.dtsi
>>> +++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sm6115.dtsi
>>> @@ -650,6 +650,28 @@ usb_hsphy: phy@1613000 {
>>> status = "disabled";
>>> };
>>>
>>> + cryptobam: dma-controller@1b04000 {
>>> + compatible = "qcom,bam-v1.7.4", "qcom,bam-v1.7.0";
>>> + reg = <0x0 0x01b04000 0x0 0x24000>;
>>> + interrupts = <GIC_SPI 247 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>;
>>> + #dma-cells = <1>;
>>> + qcom,ee = <0>;
>>> + qcom,controlled-remotely;
>>> + num-channels = <8>;
>>> + qcom,num-ees = <2>;
>>> + iommus = <&apps_smmu 0x94 0x11>,
>>> + <&apps_smmu 0x96 0x11>;
>>> + };
>>> +
>>> + crypto: crypto@1b3a000 {
>>> + compatible = "qcom,sm6115-qce", "qcom,sm8150-qce", "qcom,qce";
>>> + reg = <0x0 0x01b3a000 0x0 0x6000>;
>>> + dmas = <&cryptobam 6>, <&cryptobam 7>;
>>> + dma-names = "rx", "tx";
>>> + iommus = <&apps_smmu 0x94 0x11>,
>>> + <&apps_smmu 0x96 0x11>;
>>
>> Shouldn't you have clocks = <&rpmcc RPM_SMD_CE1_CLK> here to make sure
>> the clock for the crypto engine is on? Your binding patch (PATCH 06/11)
>> says "Crypto Engine block on Qualcomm SoCs SM6115 and QCM2290 do not
>> require clocks strictly" but doesn't say why.
>>
>> Make sure you don't rely on having rpmcc keep unused clocks on
>> permanently. This is the case at the moment, but we would like to change
>> this [2]. Adding new users that rely on this broken behavior would just
>> make this effort even more complicated.
>>
>> If you also add the clock to the cryptobam then you should be able to
>> see the advantage of my bam_dma patch [3]. It allows you to drop
>> "num-channels" and "qcom,num-ees" from the cryptobam in your changes
>> above because it can then be read directly from the BAM registers.
>
> Thanks for pointing this out. Actually that's why I was using your
> patch while testing with RB1/RB2 :)
>
> Yes, so the background is that I am preparing a new version of this
> crypto enablement patchset.
> Also your assumption about the clocks being turned on by the firmware
> is true for RB1/RB2 devices, so enabling them via Linux is optional as
> per Qualcomm enggs.
This is not necessarily true. Currently it's kept always-on on
by clk_smd_rpm_handoff, but that's a hack from 10 years ago when smd
was still new.

>
> So, I am testing the new patchset right now with 'clock' entries
> provided in the .dtsi and see if that causes any issue / improvement
> (etc.)
It won't change since it's on anyway, but that won't be a given for long.

Konrad
>
> Will come back with updates (and a new version of this patchset) soon.
>
> Regards,
> Bhupesh
>
>> Thanks,
>> Stephan
>>
>> [2]: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-arm-msm/20230303-topic-rpmcc_sleep-v2-0-ae80a325fe94@linaro.org/
>> [3]: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-arm-msm/20230518-bamclk-dt-v1-1-82f738c897d9@gerhold.net/