linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0/9] drivers: mailbox: framework creation

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]

Date:	Fri, 21 Dec 2012 13:33:08 -0600
From:	Omar Ramirez Luna <omar.ramirez@...itl.com>
To:	Loic PALLARDY <loic.pallardy@...com>
Cc:	Ohad Ben-Cohen <ohad@...ery.com>, Olof Johansson <olof@...om.net>,
	Tony Lindgren <tony@...mide.com>,
	Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>,
	Loic PALLARDY STE <loic.pallardy-ext@...ricsson.com>,
	"arm@...nel.org" <arm@...nel.org>,
	Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
	Russell King <linux@....linux.org.uk>,
	Janusz Krzysztofik <jkrzyszt@....icnet.pl>,
	Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
	Mark Brown <broonie@...nsource.wolfsonmicro.com>,
	Dom Cobley <popcornmix@...il.com>,
	Wim Van Sebroeck <wim@...ana.be>, Suman Anna <s-anna@...com>,
	Juan Gutierrez <jgutierrez@...com>,
	Felipe Contreras <felipe.contreras@...ia.com>,
	Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>,
	linux-arm <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"linux-omap@...r.kernel.org" <linux-omap@...r.kernel.org>,
	STEricsson_nomadik_linux <STEricsson_nomadik_linux@...t.st.com>,
	Omar Ramirez Luna <omar.luna@...aro.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/9] drivers: mailbox: framework creation

Hi Loic/Ohad,

On Fri, Dec 21, 2012 at 2:52 AM, Loic PALLARDY <loic.pallardy@...com> wrote:
>
>
> On 12/21/2012 08:31 AM, Ohad Ben-Cohen wrote:
>> On Thu, Dec 20, 2012 at 9:19 PM, Olof Johansson<olof@...om.net>  wrote:
>>> While we can make the branch stable, would it make sense to make
>>> remoteproc for omap depend on !multiplatform during the transition, to
>>> reduce dependencies a little? Either way works, but it'd be nice to
>>> keep them independent if we can.
>>
>> I'm not sure multiplatform is the culprit; OMAP's remoteproc driver
>> heavily depends on this mailbox code, and obviously breaks with this
>> patch-set if only for the the naming changes. We'll need this patch
>> set to update omap's remoteproc as well so at least we don't break
>> bisectibility, though running a sanity test before merging would be
>> even nicer (Loic I can help if you don't have a panda board).
>
> Hi Ohad,
> Yes tidspbridge and remoteproc must be adapted.
> This new mailbox fw has been tested on TI environment by Omar, who did
> adaptation at least for tidspbridge.
>
> Omar, do you have patch series ready for TI adaptations to new mailbox
> framework?
> Else I can do it, but I won't be able to test it (no panda board)

Yes, I made the changes, for tidspbridge and remoteproc, I will submit
both for review, based on this series.

Cheers,

Omar
--
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/