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]
Message-ID: <20100924075740.GA20599@oksana.dev.rtsoft.ru>
Date:	Fri, 24 Sep 2010 11:57:40 +0400
From:	Anton Vorontsov <cbouatmailru@...il.com>
To:	LEROY Christophe <christophe.leroy@....fr>
Cc:	Grant Likely <grant.likely@...retlab.ca>,
	David Brownell <dbrownell@...rs.sourceforge.net>,
	spi-devel-general@...ts.sourceforge.net,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org,
	Kumar Gala <galak@...nel.crashing.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] spi_mpc8xxx: issue with using definition of pram in
 Device Tree

Hello,

On Fri, Sep 24, 2010 at 09:20:27AM +0200, LEROY Christophe wrote:
> The issue is that cpm_muram_alloc_fixed() allocates memory from the
> general purpose muram area (from 0x0 to 0x1bff).
> Here we need to return a pointer to the parameter RAM, which is
> located somewhere starting at 0x1c00. It is not a dynamic allocation
> that is required here but only to point on the correct location in
> the parameter RAM.
> 
> For the CPM2, I don't know. I'm working with a MPC866.
> 
> Attached is a previous discussion on the subject where I explain a
> bit more in details the issue.

The patch looks OK, I think.

Doesn't explain why that worked on MPC8272 (CPM2) and MPC8560
(also CPM2) machines though. But here's my guess (I no longer
have these boards to test it):

On 8272 I used this node:

+                       spi@4c0 {
+                               #address-cells = <1>;
+                               #size-cells = <0>;
+                               compatible = "fsl,cpm2-spi", "fsl,spi";
+                               reg = <0x11a80 0x40 0x89fc 0x2>;

On that SOC there are two muram data regions 0x0..0x2000 and
0x9000..0x9100. Note that we actually don't want "data" regions,
and the only reason why that worked is that sysdev/cpm_common.c
maps muram(0)..muram(max).

Thanks,

-- 
Anton Vorontsov
email: cbouatmailru@...il.com
irc://irc.freenode.net/bd2
--
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/

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ