The WDR4900v1 uses the P1040 SoC, so the device tree pulls in the
definition for the related P1010 SoC. However, the P1040 lacks the
CAAM/SEC4 hardware crypto accelerator which the P1010 device tree
defines. If left defined, this causes the CAAM drivers (if present) to
attempt to use the non-existent device, making various crypto-related
operations (e.g. macsec and ipsec) fail.
This commit overrides the incorrect dt node definition in the included
file.
See also:
- https://bugs.openwrt.org/index.php?do=details&task_id=1262
- https://community.nxp.com/thread/338432#comment-474107
Signed-off-by: Tim Small <tim@seoss.co.uk>
(cherry picked from commit
e97aaf483c71fd5e3072ec2dce53354fc97357c9)
};
/include/ "fsl/p1010si-post.dtsi"
+
+/*
+ * The TL-WDR4900 v1 uses the NXP (Freescale) P1014 SoC which is closely
+ * related to the P1010.
+ *
+ * NXP QP1010FS.pdf "QorIQ P1010 and P1014 Communications Processors"
+ * datasheet states that the P1014 does not include the accelerated crypto
+ * module (CAAM/SEC4) which is present in the P1010.
+ *
+ * NXP Appliation Note AN4938 Rev. 2 implies that some P1014 may contain the
+ * SEC4 module, but states that SoCs with System Version Register values
+ * 0x80F10110 or 0x80F10120 do not have the security feature.
+ *
+ * All v1.3 TL-WDR4900 tested have SVR == 0x80F10110 which AN4938 describes
+ * as: core rev 1.0, "P1014 (without security)".
+ *
+ * The SVR value is reported by uboot on the serial console.
+ */
+
+/ {
+ soc: soc@ffe00000 {
+ /delete-node/ crypto@30000; /* Pulled in by p1010si-post */
+ };
+};