Re: [GIT PULL] ARM: mvebu: dt64 for v7.2 (#1)
Gregory CLEMENT <[email protected]> Fri, 12 Jun 2026 15:45:26 +0200
| Newsgroups | dev.linux.lists.soc,org.infradead.lists.linux-arm-kernel |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
Hello Arnd, > On Tue, Jun 9, 2026, at 21:29, Arnd Bergmann wrote: >> On Tue, Jun 9, 2026, at 19:35, Aleksander Jan Bajkowski wrote: >>> On 09/06/2026 18:11, Arnd Bergmann wrote: >>>> I'm a bit surprised by this oneline change. Since you successfully tested >>>> this, I assume the change is correct, but I have two questions that >>>> I would like to have an answer for before I pull it. >>> By the way, the upstream safexcel driver works correctly only on >>> coherent >>> platforms. On non-coherent platforms (MediaTek), the SHA-384 and SHA-512 >>> selftests fail. Since the selftests pass on Armada's SoC, I assume I'm >>> right. >> >> It's not necessarily proof that this is correct, but it is quite likely. >> >> After checking the datasheet some more and finding that this should >> indeed be coherent everywhere, I remembered that even the old >> 32-bit Armada 370 had a coherency manager. At the time, we used a hack >> in arch/arm/mach-mvebu/coherency.c to mark all device nodes as coherent, >> since the original DTB did not contain the correct annotations. >> >> I suspect that the Armada 37xx started out with a copy of the >> old DT files and also never had the annotation, but then never >> had the same hack because arch/arm64 does not have platform >> specific code. > > After investigating a little more, I think the correct fix here > will be to mark all DMA masters in this SoC as dma-coherent. > I thought there was a way to do this for an entire system, > but I could not find that, so this likely has to be done > for each DMA master separately. Thanks for doing this research. I also checked the data in the datasheet before applying the patch, and it appears the platform is coherent. I was surprised that when we initially submitted the support request, Marvel didn't mention this; usually, SoC vendors like to have good performance numbers. However, they also didn't say anything about a coherence issue. The fact that the test succeeded is a good indicator that the SoC is indeed coherent. > > Not sure who still has the hardware and has time to > test this properly. Given that the incorrect DT has > existed for over 10 years now, I assume this is not > urgent and I will skip the pull request for 7.2. I believe I still have a board based on an Armada 3700, and I should be able to find time to do some tests. Gregory > > Arnd -- Grégory CLEMENT, Bootlin Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering https://bootlin.com