| 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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <52718118.1020009@codeaurora.org> Date: Wed, 30 Oct 2013 14:58:48 -0700 From: Stephen Boyd <sboyd@...eaurora.org> To: Kumar Gala <galak@...eaurora.org> CC: linux-edac@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>, devicetree@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 4/6] edac: Document Krait L1/L2 EDAC driver binding On 10/30/13 14:56, Kumar Gala wrote: > On Oct 30, 2013, at 4:48 PM, Stephen Boyd wrote: > >> On 10/30/13 14:45, Kumar Gala wrote: >>> On Oct 30, 2013, at 3:25 PM, Stephen Boyd wrote: >>>> +l2-cache node containing the following properties: >>> Is the L1 interrupt not per core L1 cache (even if they are OR together at PIC)? >> Yes it is per CPU. That is what the 0xf part of the cpus interrupts >> property is showing. > Than why not have it in each cpu node? Because that duplicates things unnecessarily? The cpus node can hold things that are common to all CPUs to avoid duplication. If it was a different PPI for each CPU then I would agree that we need to put it in each cpu node. -- Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum, hosted by The Linux Foundation -- 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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists