linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 00/02] mach-shmobile: Emma Mobile EV2

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: <201205042316.55593.rjw@sisk.pl>
Date:	Fri, 4 May 2012 23:16:55 +0200
From:	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl>
To:	Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
Cc:	Magnus Damm <magnus.damm@...il.com>,
	linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, horms@...ge.net.au,
	linux@....linux.org.uk, linux-sh@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, lethal@...ux-sh.org, olof@...om.net
Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/02] mach-shmobile: Emma Mobile EV2 - first shot

On Friday, May 04, 2012, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> On Thursday 03 May 2012, Magnus Damm wrote:
> > mach-shmobile: Emma Mobile EV2 - first shot
> > 
> > [PATCH 01/02] mach-shmobile: Emma Mobile EV2 SoC base support
> > [PATCH 02/02] mach-shmobile: KZM9D board prototype support
> > 
> > This series adds experimental Emma Mobile EV2 support to
> > mach-shmobile. Yet another dual core Cortex-A9 SoC.
> > 
> > At this point only serial and timer is supported. Future work
> > includes GPIO, network device, SMP and DT support. If possible
> > it would be nice to use the common clocks on this platform.
> > 
> > To boot this on actual hardware you also need the following:
> > "[PATCH] serial8250-em: Emma Mobile UART driver V2"
> > "[PATCH] clocksource: em_sti: Emma Mobile STI driver"
> > 
> > Any reason to not put this in mach-shmobile?
> 
> Well, from all I can tell it shares basically zero code with the
> rest of mach-shmobile, so I would be more comfortable with creating
> a new mach-emma directory for this.

I'm not sure if I understand your point correctly, so please let me clarify.

Do you think it's better to have a separate mach-emma directory for the
new hardware because technically it is a different platform and the fact
that it was developed by the same manufacturer as the mach-shmobile hardware
is less important?

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/