| 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
| ||
|
Message-Id: <201203092327.00228.rjw@sisk.pl> Date: Fri, 9 Mar 2012 23:27:00 +0100 From: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl> To: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de> Cc: Paul Mundt <lethal@...ux-sh.org>, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Magnus Damm <magnus.damm@...il.com>, "Linux-sh list" <linux-sh@...r.kernel.org>, "arm@...nel.org" <arm@...nel.org>, Rob Herring <robherring2@...il.com> Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] Renesas SoC updates for v3.4 Hi, On Friday, March 09, 2012, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > On Friday 09 March 2012, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > > Hi, > > > > On Friday, March 09, 2012, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > > > On Friday 09 March 2012, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > > > > Hi, > > > > > > > > Please pull Renesas SoC updates for v3.4 since commit > > > > ce8fea7aa4ad9e3b40999a08622ef27c77159659: > > > > > > > > mmap: EINVAL not ENOMEM when rejecting VM_GROWS > > > > > > > > with top-most commit f57fd2100e8273af3a9d2ff67714903d2dfd1eef > > > > > > Hi Rafael, > > > > > > Please rebase this on an -rc release, otherwise we get a rather > > > messy history in the arm-soc tree. > > > > Well, OK, I can rebase it on -rc7 if there is one, unless Paul > > has already pulled from clk_ops-rename. Paul? > > Why not rebase back to -rc6? Well, I can do that too, if I have to, but still I'd like to be sure that Paul hasn't pulled from the clk_ops-rename branch yet. > > > For next time, I think it would be good to make those things separate pull > > > requests, since they are all rather big. In particular, the clk rework > > > could be a series by itself. > > > > It is a series by itself. You can readily pull it from clk_ops-rename even. :-) > > > > I'm not sure, though, what exactly the point of this would be. > > Mostly it helps make obvious which things are logically connected. > Another reason is that when one of the branches has a problem, we > can still pull all the other ones. > Finally, we sometimes make new topic branches in the arm-soc tree > when a lot of maintainers send similar things, e.g. we had a > 'next/clk' branch in the past that half of your patches would > have applied to (this time we don't have one of those). By having > more branches for logically separate things, it allows us to group > them in more flexible ways across platforms. OK > It's not very important this time, so I didn't ask you to rebase > them just for that. OK, thanks! > > > arnd@...ppe2:~/linux-arm$ git grep -w __io arch/arm/mach-* | grep -v __typesafe > > > arch/arm/mach-cns3xxx/core.c: gic_init(0, 29, __io(CNS3XXX_TC11MP_GIC_DIST_BASE_VIRT), > > > arch/arm/mach-cns3xxx/core.c: __io(CNS3XXX_TC11MP_GIC_CPU_BASE_VIRT)); > > > arch/arm/mach-cns3xxx/core.c: u32 __iomem *pm_base = __io(CNS3XXX_PM_BASE_VIRT); > > > arch/arm/mach-cns3xxx/core.c: cns3xxx_tmr1 = __io(CNS3XXX_TIMER1_2_3_BASE_VIRT); > > > arch/arm/mach-cns3xxx/devices.c: u32 __iomem *gpioa = __io(CNS3XXX_MISC_BASE_VIRT + 0x0014); > > > arch/arm/mach-netx/generic.c: vic_init(__io(io_p2v(NETX_PA_VIC)), 0, ~0, 0); > > > arch/arm/mach-netx/include/mach/netx-regs.h:#define NETX_SYSTEM_REG(ofs) __io(NETX_VA_SYSTEM + (ofs)) > > > arch/arm/mach-netx/include/mach/netx-regs.h:#define NETX_GPIO_REG(ofs) __io(NETX_VA_GPIO + (ofs)) > > > arch/arm/mach-netx/include/mach/netx-regs.h:#define NETX_PIO_REG(ofs) __io(NETX_VA_PIO + (ofs)) > > > arch/arm/mach-netx/include/mach/netx-regs.h:#define NETX_MIIMU __io(NETX_VA_MIIMU) > > > arch/arm/mach-netx/include/mach/netx-regs.h:#define NETX_PFIFO_REG(ofs) __io(NETX_VA_PFIFO + (ofs)) > > > arch/arm/mach-netx/include/mach/netx-regs.h:#define NETX_MEMCR_REG(ofs) __io(NETX_VA_MEMCR + (ofs)) > > > arch/arm/mach-netx/include/mach/netx-regs.h:#define NETX_DPMAS_REG(ofs) __io(NETX_VA_DPMAS + (ofs)) > > > arch/arm/mach-netx/include/mach/netx-regs.h:#define NETX_I2C_REG(ofs) __io(NETX_VA_I2C, (ofs)) > > > arch/arm/mach-realview/include/mach/hardware.h:#define __io_address(n) __io(IO_ADDRESS(n)) > > > arch/arm/mach-shmobile/board-ag5evm.c: l2x0_init(__io(0xf0100000), 0x00460000, 0xc2000fff); > > > arch/arm/mach-shmobile/board-bonito.c: l2x0_init(__io(0xf0002000), 0x40440000, 0x82000fff); > > > arch/arm/mach-shmobile/board-kota2.c: l2x0_init(__io(0xf0100000), 0x40460000, 0x82000fff); > > > arch/arm/mach-shmobile/include/mach/io.h:#define __io(a) ((void __iomem *)(a)) > > > arch/arm/mach-shmobile/intc-r8a7779.c: void __iomem *gic_dist_base = __io(0xf0001000); > > > arch/arm/mach-shmobile/intc-r8a7779.c: void __iomem *gic_cpu_base = __io(0xf0000100); > > > arch/arm/mach-shmobile/intc-sh73a0.c: void __iomem *gic_dist_base = __io(0xf0001000); > > > arch/arm/mach-shmobile/intc-sh73a0.c: void __iomem *gic_cpu_base = __io(0xf0000100); > > > arch/arm/mach-shmobile/smp-r8a7779.c: __raw_writel(__pa(shmobile_secondary_vector), __io(AVECR)); > > > arch/arm/mach-shmobile/smp-sh73a0.c: if (((__raw_readl(__io(PSTR)) >> (4 * cpu)) & 3) == 3) > > > arch/arm/mach-shmobile/smp-sh73a0.c: __raw_writel(1 << cpu, __io(WUPCR)); /* wake up */ > > > arch/arm/mach-shmobile/smp-sh73a0.c: __raw_writel(1 << cpu, __io(SRESCR)); /* reset */ > > > arch/arm/mach-shmobile/smp-sh73a0.c: __raw_writel(0, __io(APARMBAREA)); /* 4k */ > > > arch/arm/mach-shmobile/smp-sh73a0.c: __raw_writel(__pa(shmobile_secondary_vector), __io(SBAR)); > > > arch/arm/mach-ux500/include/mach/hardware.h:#define __io_address(n) __io(IO_ADDRESS(n)) > > > > > > These are all broken and need to be changed to something else before we add the > > > global definition for __io. > > > > While I generally agree with that, I think it's not super-urgent, is it? > > No, it's not. I just wanted to let you all know now so we don't forget it. OK Thanks, Rafael -- 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