linux-kernel - Re: ARM, SoC: About the use DT-defined properties by 3rd-party drivers

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, 12 Sep 2016 18:07:27 +0100
From:   Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>
To:     Timur Tabi <timur@...i.org>
Cc:     Warner Losh <imp@...imp.com>, Sebastian Frias <sf84@...oste.net>,
        devicetree <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
        Mason <slash.tmp@...e.fr>,
        Linux ARM <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: ARM, SoC: About the use DT-defined properties by 3rd-party
 drivers

On Mon, Sep 12, 2016 at 11:49:07AM -0500, Timur Tabi wrote:
> Warner Losh wrote:
> >Do I have more examples
> >where FreeBSD has to deviate because the DT is actually Linux
> >specific and does a poor job of modeling the hardware and instead
> >reflects the Linux driver model? I have plenty of those...
> 
> I think it would be a great idea if the FreeBSD and Linux DT
> maintainers collaborated on cleaning up the DT bindings so that this
> problem no longer occurs (or at least, not normally).

Indeed. Theoretically/hopefully, the devicetree.org stuff creates a more
inclusive forum for this.

Thanks,
Mark.