linux-kernel - Re: [GIT PULL] DT/core: cpu

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: <1376428024.4255.14.camel@pasglop>
Date:	Wed, 14 Aug 2013 07:07:04 +1000
From:	Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org>
To:	Sudeep KarkadaNagesha <Sudeep.KarkadaNagesha@....com>
Cc:	"linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org" <linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org>,
	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl>,
	"rob.herring@...xeda.com" <rob.herring@...xeda.com>,
	Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>,
	Olof Johansson <olof@...om.net>,
	"linux-pm@...r.kernel.org" <linux-pm@...r.kernel.org>,
	"linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org" 
	<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"devicetree@...r.kernel.org" <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] DT/core: cpu_ofnode updates for v3.12

On Tue, 2013-08-13 at 19:29 +0100, Sudeep KarkadaNagesha wrote:
> I don't understand completely the use of ibm,ppc-interrupt-server#s and
> its implications on generic of_get_cpu_node implementation.
> I see the PPC specific definition of of_get_cpu_node uses thread id only
> in 2 instances. Based on that, I have tried to move all the other
> instances to use generic definition.
> 
> Let me know if the idea is correct.

No. The device-tree historically only represents cores, not HW threads, so
it makes sense to retrieve also the thread number corresponding to the CPU.

However, the mechanism to represent HW threads in the device-tree is currently
somewhat platform specific (the ibm,ppc-interrupt-server#s).

So what you could do for now is:

 - Have a generic version that always returns 0 as the thread, which is weak

 - powerpc keeps its own implementation

 - Start a discussion on the bindings (if not already there) to define threads
in a better way at which point the generic function can be updated.

Cheers,
Ben.


--
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/