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, 17 Nov 2014 18:18:24 -0800
From:	"santosh.shilimkar@...cle.com" <santosh.shilimkar@...cle.com>
To:	Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>, Kevin Hilman <khilman@...nel.org>
CC:	Grygorii Strashko <grygorii.strashko@...com>, ssantosh@...nel.org,
	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>, linux-pm@...r.kernel.org,
	Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>, grant.likely@...retlab.ca,
	linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	devicetree@...r.kernel.org, Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@...aro.org>,
	Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org>,
	Dmitry Torokhov <dmitry.torokhov@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 1/2] ARM: keystone: pm: switch to use generic pm domains

On 11/17/14 12:37 PM, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> On Monday 17 November 2014 11:14:16 Kevin Hilman wrote:
>>>>
>>>> So, The Keystone 2 Generic PM Controller is just a proxy PM layer here between
>>>> device and Generic clock manipulation PM callbacks.
>>>> It fills per-device clock list when device is attached to GPD and
>>>> ensures that all clocks from that list enabled/disabled when device is
>>>> started/stopped.
>>>
>>> The idea of such a generic power domain implementation sounds useful, but
>>> it has absolutely no business in platform specific code.
>>
>> Yes it does.  This isn't a generic power domain implementation, but
>> rather just the platform-specific glue that hooks up the clocks to the
>> right devices and power-domains so that the generic power-domain and
>> generic pm_clocks code does the right thing.
>
> How would you do this on an arm64 version of keystone then? With
> the current approach, you'd need to add a machine specific directory,
> and that seems completely pointless since this is not even about
> a hardware requirement.
>
The Keystone PM domain code actually doesn't have to be under machine
code. Infact my first patch I added that under drivers/bus/ and later
based on Kevin's suggestion moved under machine. That time the Keystone
64 bit arch point I couldn't bring up for other reasons.

But the code itself can be easily moved to drivers/power/ without
any issue if thats what is the concern here.

Regards,
Santosh
--
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/

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ