linux-kernel - Re: ARM: EXYNOS: Fixes for 4.1

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Sat, 9 May 2015 09:42:45 +0900
From:	Krzysztof Kozlowski <k.kozlowski@...sung.com>
To:	Kukjin Kim <kgene@...nel.org>
Cc:	Krzysztof Kozlowski <k.kozlowski@...sung.com>,
	linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
	linux-samsung-soc@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Olof Johansson <olof@...om.net>, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
Subject: Re: ARM: EXYNOS: Fixes for 4.1

2015-05-09 3:26 GMT+09:00 Kukjin Kim <kgene@...nel.org>:
> On 05/06/15 09:55, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>> Krzysztof Kozlowski (1):
>>       ARM: EXYNOS: Fix failed second suspend on Exynos4
>>
>>  arch/arm/mach-exynos/common.h  |  2 ++
>>  arch/arm/mach-exynos/exynos.c  | 27 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>  arch/arm/mach-exynos/platsmp.c | 39 ++-------------------------------------
>>  arch/arm/mach-exynos/suspend.c |  3 +++
>>  4 files changed, 34 insertions(+), 37 deletions(-)
>> --
>
> Hi Krzysztof,
>
> Yeah, the patch is old thing but if I remember correctly, I couldn't
> apply it because of soc_is_xxx() macro. Yes, I agree with the way,
> firstly fix something and if required, then update it later....But!
>
> Please address comments about that, if not, it will not be accepted by
> arm-soc tree.

Hi,

Actually during previous discussion I addressed all the issues:
https://lkml.org/lkml/2015/3/18/108
but there was no response from your side.

In previous thread you also asked about proper way of using the
DELAYED_RESET_ASSERTION. I tried to obtain additional docs from LSI
but couldn't. In current documentation it was described vaguely so I
looked at vendor source code. The patch IMHO is the best solution.
Additionally it was tested (Chanwoo and Bartlomiej) and fixes the
issue.

As for the soc_is_exynos -> of_machine_is_compatible I will prepare a
follow up to fix this.

Let me know if you have any other comments about it.

Best regards,
Krzysztof
--
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/