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>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date:	Mon, 04 Apr 2011 11:27:41 +0200
From:	Nicolas Ferre <nicolas.ferre@...el.com>
To:	Detlef Vollmann <dv@...lmann.ch>
CC:	Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>, david@...g.hm,
	Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@....linux.org.uk>,
	Nicolas Pitre <nico@...xnic.net>,
	Tony Lindgren <tony@...mide.com>,
	Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
	lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
	linux-omap@...r.kernel.org,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	David Brown <davidb@...eaurora.org>,
	linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
	Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD <plagnioj@...osoft.com>
Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] omap changes for v2.6.39 merge window

Le 01/04/2011 17:30, Detlef Vollmann :
> On 04/01/11 16:59, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
>> On Friday 01 April 2011, Detlef Vollmann wrote:
>>> On 04/01/11 15:54, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
>>
>>>> 9. All interesting work is going into a handful of platforms, all of
>>>> which
>>>>      are ARMv7 based.
>>> Define interesting.
>>
>> The ones that are causing the churn that we're talking about.
>> Platforms that have been working forever and only need to get
>> the occasional bug fix are boring, i.e. not the problem.
> In the ARM tree I only know mach-at91.
> Atmel still introduces new SOCs based on ARM926EJ-S, and that makes
> perfect sense for lots of applications.
> And if they add support for a new SOC, they just copy an existing one,
> change some GPIOs, and submit it as new files (sorry, I'm over-
> simplifying here).
> And if you happen to wire your board a bit differently than they do,
> you have to patch theur generic file (in addidtion to add your own
> board file).
> And though I only know the mach-at91 closely, I'm pretty sure quite
> a number of other mach-* are not better.
> So this is actually why the ARM tree has such a bad reputation:
> lot's of code repetition, and still more of that.

Yes, certainly time has come for a change.

Note however that AT91 community is making great effort to:
- publish and maintain every single chip/board support since more than 5
years (and far before for first venerable at91rm9200) : if you recall
well, it was before most of code that appeared in arch/arm/mach-*
directories ;-)
- integrate ideas and patches from contributors for simplifying and
reducing board duplication
- try to conform to new infrastructures that are appearing on ARM Linux
for better convergence of code: gpiolib, leds, buttons, clocks (work in
progress)...

We know that work has to be done and we will for sure follow this effort
of consolidation. And remember: contributions welcomed ;-).

Best regards,
-- 
Nicolas Ferre

--
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