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
| ||
|
Date: Thu, 13 Aug 2015 16:34:13 +0800 From: Hanjun Guo <hanjun.guo@...aro.org> To: David Daney <ddaney@...iumnetworks.com>, Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com> CC: mark.rutland@....com, linux-mips@...ux-mips.org, david.daney@...ium.com, netdev@...r.kernel.org, rafael@...nel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, tomasz.nowicki@...aro.org, rrichter@...ium.com, linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org, ddaney.cavm@...il.com, sgoutham@...ium.com, David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/2] net: thunder: Add ACPI support. On 08/12/2015 11:36 PM, David Daney wrote: > On 08/12/2015 08:23 AM, Catalin Marinas wrote: >> On Tue, Aug 11, 2015 at 01:04:55PM -0700, David Daney wrote: >>> On 08/11/2015 11:49 AM, David Miller wrote: >>>> From: David Daney <ddaney.cavm@...il.com> >>>> Date: Mon, 10 Aug 2015 17:58:35 -0700 >>>> >>>>> Change from v1: Drop PHY binding part, use fwnode_property* APIs. >>>>> >>>>> The first patch (1/2) rearranges the existing code a little with no >>>>> functional change to get ready for the second. The second (2/2) does >>>>> the actual work of adding support to extract the needed information >>>> >from the ACPI tables. >>>> >>>> Series applied. >>> >>> Thank you very much. >>> >>>> In the future it might be better structured to try and get the OF >>>> node, and if that fails then try and use the ACPI method to obtain >>>> these values. >>> >>> Our current approach, as you can see in the patch, is the opposite. >>> If ACPI >>> is being used, prefer that over the OF device tree. >>> >>> You seem to be recommending precedence for OF. It should be consistent >>> across all drivers/sub-systems, so do you really think that OF before >>> ACPI >>> is the way to go? >> >> On arm64 (unless you use a vendor kernel), DT takes precedence over ACPI >> if both arm provided to the kernel (and it's a fair assumption given >> that ACPI on ARM is still in the early days). You could also force ACPI >> with acpi=force on the kernel cmd line and the arch code will not >> unflatten the DT even if it is provided, therefore is_of_node(fwnode) >> returning false. Yes. on the other hand, if no DT is provided, will try ACPI even if no acpi=force on the kernel cmd line. >> >> I haven't looked at your driver in detail but something like AMD's >> xgbe_probe() uses a single function for both DT and ACPI with >> device_property_read_*() functions getting the information from the >> correct place in either case. The ACPI vs DT precedence is handled by >> the arch boot code, we never mix the two and confuse the drivers. >> > > My long term plan is to create something like > firmware_get_mac_address(), that would encapsulate of_get_mac_address() > and the ACPI equivalent. > > Same for firmware_phy_find_device(). I'm very keen on seeing that happens :) Thanks Hanjun -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Powered by blists - more mailing lists