linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] ARM64: Add new Xilinx ZynqMP SoC

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, 24 Feb 2015 15:58:47 +0100
From:	Michal Simek <michal.simek@...inx.com>
To:	Rob Herring <robherring2@...il.com>,
	Michal Simek <michal.simek@...inx.com>
CC:	"linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org" 
	<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
	Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
	Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>,
	Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
	Pawel Moll <pawel.moll@....com>,
	Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
	Ian Campbell <ijc+devicetree@...lion.org.uk>,
	Kumar Gala <galak@...eaurora.org>,
	Sören Brinkmann <soren.brinkmann@...inx.com>,
	Robert Richter <rrichter@...ium.com>,
	Mark Brown <broonie@...aro.org>,
	Eddie Huang <eddie.huang@...iatek.com>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"devicetree@...r.kernel.org" <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ARM64: Add new Xilinx ZynqMP SoC

On 02/24/2015 03:42 PM, Rob Herring wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 24, 2015 at 1:56 AM, Michal Simek <michal.simek@...inx.com> wrote:
>> Initial version of device tree for Xilinx ZynqMP SoC.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Michal Simek <michal.simek@...inx.com>
>> Acked-by: Sören Brinkmann <soren.brinkmann@...inx.com>
>> ---
> 
> [...]
> 
>> +               gic: interrupt-controller@...10000 {
>> +                       compatible = "arm,cortex-a15-gic", "arm,cortex-a9-gic";
> 
> gic-400, right?

yep

> 
>> +                       #interrupt-cells = <3>;
>> +                       reg = <0x0 0xf9010000 0x10000>,
>> +                             <0x0 0xf9020000 0x20000>,
>> +                             <0x0 0xf9040000 0x20000>,
>> +                             <0x0 0xf9060000 0x20000>;
> 
> These addresses are wrong if you are doing address swizzling to do 64K
> offsets. We don't really have an answer yet as to what is the right
> way. See the XGene GIC discussion[1].

Is this better for GICC?
<0x0 0xf902f000 0x2000>

Thanks,
Michal
--
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/