linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] arm64: amd-seattle: Adding device tree for AMD Seattle platform

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:	Tue, 28 Oct 2014 08:07:49 -0500
From:	Suravee Suthikulanit <suravee.suthikulpanit@....com>
To:	Alexander Graf <agraf@...e.de>,
	Andreas Färber <afaerber@...e.de>
CC:	"mark.rutland@....com" <mark.rutland@....com>,
	Thomas Lendacky <Thomas.Lendacky@....com>,
	Joel Schopp <Joel.Schopp@....com>,
	"marc.zyngier@....com" <marc.zyngier@....com>,
	"catalin.marinas@....com" <catalin.marinas@....com>,
	"liviu.dudau@....com" <liviu.dudau@....com>,
	"<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"will.deacon@....com" <will.deacon@....com>,
	Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
	"linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org" 
	<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] arm64: amd-seattle: Adding device tree for AMD Seattle
 platform

On 10/27/2014 6:25 PM, Alexander Graf wrote:
>
>
> On 27.10.14 15:29, Suravee Suthikulanit wrote:
>> On 10/26/2014 9:08 AM, Alexander Graf wrote:
>>>>> This option doesn't exist in upstream kernels, does it? Why not just
>>>>>>> make it dtb-y?
>>>>>
>>>>> CONFIG_ARCH_SEATTLE is being added one hunk above.:)
>>> Oops:).
>>>
>>> I'm not convinced we need a config option just for the sake of
>>> compiling a device tree though.
>>>
>>>
>>> Alex
>>>
>>
>> Eventually, we would add other device driver selections when
>> CONFIG_ARCH_SEATTLE=y. At this point, those drivers are still not ready.
>
> Could you please give me some examples of drivers that would depend on
> CONFIG_ARCH_SEATTLE? I like the current way things work without the need
> for such an option, where everything's implemented purely as drivers you
> can opt in our out of.
>
> You don't have a CONFIG_ARCH_SB7XX on x86 either, right? ;)
>
>
> Alex
>

I am not saying that device drivers need to depend on 
CONFIG_ARCH_SEATTLE. I am thinking along the line of an easy way to 
enable SOC without having to manually select each of the required 
drivers to support the SOC. An example is the "ARCH_VEXPRESS".

Suravee

--
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/