linux-kernel - Re: [rfc] exposing MMR's of on-chip peripherals for debugging purposes

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Mon, 28 Jan 2008 19:08:47 -0500 (EST)
From:	Daniel Barkalow <barkalow@...ervon.org>
To:	Mike Frysinger <vapier.adi@...il.com>
cc:	richard kennedy <richard@....demon.co.uk>, bryan.wu@...log.com,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Bryan Wu <cooloney.lkml@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [rfc] exposing MMR's of on-chip peripherals for debugging
 purposes

On Mon, 28 Jan 2008, Mike Frysinger wrote:

> On Jan 28, 2008 8:04 AM, richard kennedy <richard@....demon.co.uk> wrote:
> > Mike Frysinger wrote:
> > > On Jan 28, 2008 5:40 AM, Bryan Wu <bryan.wu@...log.com> wrote:
> > >> On Mon, 2008-01-28 at 05:16 -0500, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> > >>> the trouble is that this file currently weighs in at ~1.8 megs.  this
> > >>> is because it contains all the information for all Blackfin processors
> > >>> we support (which currently, is about ~23 variants).  it's only going
> > >>> to get bigger as we support more.  Bryan cringes at the thought of
> > >>> submitting it to LKML :).  so i'm fishing around for alternatives ...
> > >>> the code was originally developed against 2.6.21, so UIO was not a
> > >>> possibility.  i'm still not sure if it is ... i'd have to research it
> > >>> a bit more and play with things.
> > >> The main reason I am not willing to submit this to mainline is the file
> > >> size. It's almost the biggest file in the kernel source. And it will be
> > >> bigger and bigger when more and more new Blackfin processors supported
> > >> by Linux kernel.
> > >
> > > a quick check of current git shows it is significantly larger than any other ;)
> > >
> > >> My suggestion is:
> > >> Or more deeper thought:
> > >>  - we don't need all the MMR setup at the same time for debugging. for example, maybe for some developer, he/she only needs one driver MMR for debugging such as watchdog/usb/spi/i2c ....
> > >
> > > splitting things up doesnt really address the original issue: there's
> > > a lot of info here to be kept in the kernel
> > >
> > >>  - How about split the debug MMR table to each drivers or processors?
> > >>  - watchdog driver implements a debug FS interface for debugging watchdog MMR and other drivers implement their own things.
> > >
> > > this had been mentioned before as a possibility but shot down.  you do
> > > not want to tie the creation of these debug files to anything as the
> > > prevents independent development of any other drivers/application that
> > > use the same peripheral.
> >
> > there is a lot of duplication in your file, but you could slim it down a
> > bit if thats the only objection.
> 
> i imagine there's a ton of duplication ... the file is auto-generated
> from XML files, so i could take a look at the autogeneration producing
> unified code.

Could you submit the XML files and the autogeneration code? The C file 
isn't really source. Not only is it big, it'll probably change around a 
whole lot when you make small changes to your process, be hard to review, 
etc.

	-Daniel
*This .sig left intentionally blank*
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/