linux-kernel - Re: OpenRISC Architecture: Request for review

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: <201106191906.23874.arnd@arndb.de>
Date:	Sun, 19 Jun 2011 19:06:23 +0200
From:	Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
To:	Jonas Bonn <jonas@...thpole.se>
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
Subject: Re: OpenRISC Architecture: Request for review

On Sunday 19 June 2011 13:43:26 Jonas Bonn wrote:
> 
> This is a port of Linux to the OpenRISC 1000 architecture.
> 
> The OpenRISC architecture was conceived with the idea of creating a CPU
> with an open specification and freely licensed implementations thereof.
> The OR1200 implementation of the OpenRISC 1000 architecture is LGPL licensed,
> runs on FPGA's from a broad number of vendors, and is currently being
> used in a number of successful industrial projects.

Hi Jonas,

Thanks for your submission, it looks very nice and is well split up into
readable patches. I have no doubt that you will be able to get this included
in Linux-3.1 given the high quality. I'll go through the individual patches
and comment on anything that sticks out. Please resubmit once you have
addressed all of the comments from me and other people, and take
linux-arch@...r.kernel.org on Cc for the second round, because otherwise
some people may miss the patches in the daily flood.

> There's a short TODO.openrisc file, as well.  Some of the items listed
> there could potentially be done before any pull request for the architecture
> is sent.

How about including the TODO file here?

> There are also fair number of places where we still have old test code
> laying about inside #ifdefs and comments.  The intention is to get all that
> cleaned up before the final pull request, but I didn't want to allow that
> to delay beginning the review process any further.

I agree that this is important to clean it all up, but it's good that you
posted the current version.

I would also suggest that you let Stephen Rothwell add your git tree to
the linux-next sources, provided that it merges cleanly with the upstream
kernel.

	Arnd
--
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/