linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] arm: omap: RX-51: ARM errata 430973 workaround

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-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <24838523.73311.1364448607026.JavaMail.apache@mail82.abv.bg>
Date:	Thu, 28 Mar 2013 07:30:07 +0200 (EET)
From:	Ивайло Димитров 
	<freemangordon@....bg>
To:	Tony Lindgren <tony@...mide.com>
Cc:	pali.rohar@...il.com, nm@...com, linux@....linux.org.uk,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-omap@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] arm: omap: RX-51: ARM errata 430973 workaround

 Tony,

Who do you expect to make that code merge? Do you expect us to mechanically merge RX51 PPA API patch with the existing generic OMAP PPA API code putting #ifdefs all over the place? Not that it is impossible, but the only real piece of HW I have here is n900, so I just can't be sure the code will still work on the other platforms besides RX51, once the code modified. Please, advice on how to proceed.

Regards,
Ivo

 >-------- Оригинално писмо --------
 >От:  Tony Lindgren 
 >Относно: Re: [PATCH] arm: omap: RX-51: ARM errata 430973 workaround
 >До: Pali Rohár 
 >Изпратено на: Сряда, 2013, Март 27 23:12:09 EET
 >
 >
 >* Pali Rohár  [130327 14:09]:
 >> On Wednesday 27 March 2013 21:56:07 Tony Lindgren wrote:
 >> > * Pali Rohár  [130324 07:31]:
 >> > > it is possible to upstream errata 430973 workaround for
 >> > > RX-51?
 >> > 
 >> > I think we should make the SMC handling a generic function for
 >> > ARM.
 >> > 
 >> > AFAIK just the SMC call numbering is different for various
 >> > implementations. So the handler and passing of the parameters
 >> > seems like it should be generic.
 >> > 
 >> 
 >> Not only, look at freemangordon's email: 
 >> https://lkml.org/lkml/2013/3/1/62
 >
 >Seem like you may need some SoC specific wrapper to the
 >generic function to deal with the params. But still seems
 >like we can have an ARM generic smc funtion.
 >
 >Regards,
 >
 >Tony
 >
--
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/