linux-kernel - Re: [Ksummit-2013-discuss] [ARM ATTEND] arch/arm SoC organization

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:	Fri, 2 Aug 2013 16:06:37 -0700
From:	Christian Daudt <csd_b@...dt.org>
To:	Tony Lindgren <tony@...mide.com>
Cc:	Jason Cooper <jason@...edaemon.net>, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
	ksummit-2013-discuss@...ts.linuxfoundation.org,
	Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>,
	Olof Johansson <olof@...om.net>,
	Linux ARM Kernel <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [Ksummit-2013-discuss] [ARM ATTEND] arch/arm SoC organization

On Fri, Aug 2, 2013 at 1:33 AM, Tony Lindgren <tony@...mide.com> wrote:
> * Jason Cooper <jason@...edaemon.net> [130731 07:25]:
>> So, I'd like to propose we discuss some lessons learned and maybe arrive
>> at some best practices.  eg, should we just go with mach-$COMPANY/?  How
>> best to handle config symbols for efficient building?  Deprecation path
>> for legacy (unconverted) boards?
>
> A lot of that problem goes away by initializing everything as late
> as possible, and making things to live under drivers.
One category of items that we haven't found a good place for in this
new multiplatform world is where does dt-driven non-driver code reside
? e.g. we have a secure monitor access function that only kicks in if
the appropriate dt entry is available . It currently resides in
mach-bcm/bcm_kona_smc.c as it seems like the only location for it at
the moment, but that doesn't seem like the best place because (a)
mach-bcm might end up littered with one-of cases like this and (b)
anything in mach-bcm is not visible to arm64 SoCs, and some of those
in the future will need to share with their arm32 cousins.
 But putting in drivers (e.g. drivers/smc) seems like the wrong thing
to do also because this is not a driver.
 We have a couple of other smallish pieces of IP that just need a bit
of generic init code to keep them happy, which we were discussing
internally where to best land them. At present they are also headed to
mach-bcm.
 Ultimately the question is 'what is allowed to reside in mach-<misc>
?' And by extension: 'is there a good home for everything else ?''

 Thanks,
   csd
--
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/