linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/2] ARM: mach-sa1100: Fix for the use of wrong CPU

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]

Message-ID: <cecb6d8f1003271530w11943d52hc1c815b23722fb35@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Sat, 27 Mar 2010 19:30:34 -0300
From:	Marcelo Jimenez <mroberto@...i.cetuc.puc-rio.br>
To:	Kristoffer Ericson <kristoffer.ericson@...il.com>
Cc:	Dmitry Artamonow <mad_soft@...ox.ru>,
	Russell King <rmk+kernel@....linux.org.uk>,
	"Robert P. J. Day" <rpjday@...shcourse.ca>,
	linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] ARM: mach-sa1100: Fix for the use of wrong CPU_FREQ 
	code in nanoengine.

Hi Kristoffer,

On Sat, Mar 27, 2010 at 19:07, Kristoffer Ericson
<kristoffer.ericson@...il.com> wrote:
> On Fri, 26 Mar 2010 18:53:10 -0300
> Marcelo Roberto Jimenez <mroberto@...i.cetuc.puc-rio.br> wrote:
>
>> This patch selects the right CPU_FREQ module to use with nanoengine.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Marcelo Roberto Jimenez <mroberto@...i.cetuc.puc-rio.br>
>
> I think you should add more information regarding the patch.
> Like addition of memory, extending the sdram_params->name length,
> Cleaning up header content and order.
> Just looking at the commit message it doesnt cover everything thats done.

Ok, will do that.

> Also, for me this doesnt apply at all. It might be my setup
> being corrupt, but is it synced with latest git?
>
> Patch number 2 doesnt either apply for me.

Sorry, they depend upon my first patch set, the one that adds
nanoengine back to the kernel. I thought about merging it with the
first, but I also thought it might cause confusion if someone had
already applied it:

http://lists.arm.linux.org.uk/lurker/message/20100311.200959.9dd2e2d1.en.html

The other patches are:

http://lists.arm.linux.org.uk/lurker/message/20100311.201022.58a74029.en.html
http://lists.arm.linux.org.uk/lurker/message/20100311.201023.17169815.en.html
http://lists.arm.linux.org.uk/lurker/message/20100311.201024.d78c81ac.en.html
http://lists.arm.linux.org.uk/lurker/message/20100311.201025.b9812efa.en.html

http://lists.arm.linux.org.uk/lurker/message/20100312.142346.0f32234c.en.html
http://lists.arm.linux.org.uk/lurker/message/20100312.142347.0c7e0e21.en.html

http://lists.arm.linux.org.uk/lurker/message/20100324.230457.f07b83bd.en.html
http://lists.arm.linux.org.uk/lurker/message/20100324.234510.4e6f1816.en.html

http://lists.arm.linux.org.uk/lurker/message/20100326.215310.ba4ef076.en.html
http://lists.arm.linux.org.uk/lurker/message/20100326.215311.ce1245a0.en.html

A total of eleven patches. The only dependency up to now is that the
last patch depends on the first.

> Best wishes
> Kristoffer

Regards,
Marcelo.
--
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/