linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] arm: document "mach-virt" platform.

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: <1391102981.9495.46.camel@kazak.uk.xensource.com>
Date:	Thu, 30 Jan 2014 17:29:41 +0000
From:	Ian Campbell <Ian.Campbell@...rix.com>
To:	Marc Zyngier <marc.zyngier@....com>
CC:	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"Rob Herring" <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
	Pawel Moll <Pawel.Moll@....com>,
	Mark Rutland <Mark.Rutland@....com>,
	Kumar Gala <galak@...eaurora.org>,
	Olof Johansson <olof@...om.net>, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
	Will Deacon <Will.Deacon@....com>,
	Stefano Stabellini <stefano.stabellini@...citrix.com>,
	"devicetree@...r.kernel.org" <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
	"linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org" 
	<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] arm: document "mach-virt" platform.

On Thu, 2014-01-30 at 17:24 +0000, Marc Zyngier wrote:
> >> I'm afraid I disagree with most of the above. The whole point of
> >> mach-virt is to provide a shell for DT platforms. None of this hardware
> >> is mandated. Instead, all the necessary information should be described
> >> in DT.
> > 
> > "Add support for the smallest, dumbest possible platform, to be
> >  used as a guest for KVM or other hypervisors.
> > 
> >  It only mandates a GIC and architected timers"
> > 
> > (your original commit message :-P)
> 
> Right. 1984, here we come. I'll disappear for a while, rewriting the
> history. More seriously, that was just me scheming to get it merged,
> hiding my cunning plan for mach-virt world domination!

:-)

> >> Actually, mach-virt doesn't really stand for Virtual Machine. It stands
> >> for virtual mach-* directory! Eventually, mach-virt should become the
> >> default platform, the one we use when we don't match anything else in
> >> the kernel
> > 
> > I can word it more like that for sure, along with the alternative
> > wording suggested by Christopher/Stefano to clarify the intent that
> > everything comes from DTB and removal of the specific requirements for
> > GIC/timer/PSCI I think that suit the (new) intention better?
> 
> Yes, please! :-)

OK, I'll come up with an updated version.

Cheers,
Ian.

--
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/