linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v5 4/4] misc: sram: add support for configurable allocation order

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: <CACxGe6tEeG6kVBMDbDi3h5hO4PcuO0EfA6q-_5tKB3ipCr+O3g@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Fri, 16 Nov 2012 14:11:25 +0000
From:	Grant Likely <grant.likely@...retlab.ca>
To:	Matt Porter <mporter@...com>
Cc:	Philipp Zabel <p.zabel@...gutronix.de>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
	Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
	Rob Herring <rob.herring@...xeda.com>,
	Paul Gortmaker <paul.gortmaker@...driver.com>,
	Shawn Guo <shawn.guo@...aro.org>,
	Richard Zhao <richard.zhao@...escale.com>,
	Huang Shijie <shijie8@...il.com>,
	Dong Aisheng <dong.aisheng@...aro.org>, kernel@...gutronix.de,
	devicetree-discuss@...ts.ozlabs.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 4/4] misc: sram: add support for configurable
 allocation order

On Fri, Nov 16, 2012 at 2:09 PM, Matt Porter <mporter@...com> wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 02:11:35PM +0100, Philipp Zabel wrote:
>> Am Mittwoch, den 14.11.2012, 19:15 +0000 schrieb Grant Likely:
>> > Assuming it is appropriate to put into the device tree, I'd suggest a
>> > different name. Instead of 'order', how about 'sram-alloc-align' (in
>> > address bits) or 'sram-alloc-min-size' (in bytes).
>>
>> A size in bytes would be the most obvious to me, although that allows to
>> enter values that are not a power of two.
>
> I think the implication is that this isn't even a h/w characteristic of
> SRAM and, as such, does not belong in a DT binding (for that reason I
> don't mind seeing that it's been dropped in v6). It's unfortunate since
> it's otherwise a very clean solution. I sure wish I had a "Software
> Tree" I could pass in too. ;)

It is however in that grey area where which it isn't really a
characteristic of the hardware it has a very strong implied usage. I
do push back on things like this not because they shouldn't be done,
but rather to make sure it is properly thought through before going
ahead.

g.
--
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/