linux-kernel - RE: [PATCH] ARM: imx: Add some core definitions for MX53

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:	Wed, 27 Oct 2010 07:57:11 -0700
From:	Nguyen Dinh-R00091 <R00091@...escale.com>
To:	Sascha Hauer <s.hauer@...gutronix.de>,
	Eric Bénard <eric@...rea.com>
CC:	Grant Likely <grant.likely@...retlab.ca>,
	<amit.kucheria@...onical.com>, <linux@....linux.org.uk>,
	<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>, <daniel@...aq.de>,
	Uwe Kleine-König 
	<u.kleine-koenig@...gutronix.de>, <valentin.longchamp@...l.ch>
Subject: RE: [PATCH] ARM: imx: Add some core definitions for MX53

Hi,

>-----Original Message-----
>From: Sascha Hauer [mailto:s.hauer@...gutronix.de]
>Sent: Wednesday, October 27, 2010 8:57 AM
>To: Eric Bénard
>Cc: Grant Likely; amit.kucheria@...onical.com; linux@....linux.org.uk; Nguyen Dinh-R00091; linux-
>kernel@...r.kernel.org; linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org; daniel@...aq.de; Uwe Kleine-König;
>valentin.longchamp@...l.ch
>Subject: Re: [PATCH] ARM: imx: Add some core definitions for MX53
>
>On Wed, Oct 27, 2010 at 03:33:07PM +0200, Eric Bénard wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> Le 27/10/2010 15:22, Sascha Hauer a écrit :
>> > That's a way we can go but only if the common name is not MX5 or MX5x.
>> > We've done it with the mx21/27 and it failed when the mx25 came out
>> > which was completely incompatible. Since then everybody looking at
>> > the code must know that mx2x is mx21/27 but not mx25. I suggest
>> > something like MX513 instead.
>> >
>> MX513 is the partnumber of a member of the i.MX51 family so that's maybe
>> not the best choice.
>
>Yes, I know. Is MX5_1_3 better? Any other suggestions?

Not sure why we can't do something like this?

In mx5x.h, 
MX51_PERIP_1 /* Address specific to mx51 */
MX53_PERIP_1 /* Address specific to mx53 */
MX5_PERIP_2 /* Address that is shared to mx51, mx53, and any later mx5X chips */
Then if something like mx57 comes, you can add to mx5x.h the differences with MX57_PERIP_1.

>
>--
>Pengutronix e.K.                           |                             |
>Industrial Linux Solutions                 | http://www.pengutronix.de/  |
>Peiner Str. 6-8, 31137 Hildesheim, Germany | Phone: +49-5121-206917-0    |
>Amtsgericht Hildesheim, HRA 2686           | Fax:   +49-5121-206917-5555 |

Thanks,
Dinh

--
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/