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: <10277248.fmjBNTktBZ@wuerfel>
Date:	Tue, 06 May 2014 09:22:32 +0200
From:	Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
To:	Rob Herring <robherring2@...il.com>
Cc:	"linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org" 
	<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
	Kukjin Kim <kgene.kim@...sung.com>,
	Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@....linux.org.uk>,
	Pankaj Dubey <pankaj.dubey@...sung.com>,
	Tomasz Figa <t.figa@...sung.com>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"linux-samsung-soc@...r.kernel.org" 
	<linux-samsung-soc@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/4] Introducing Exynos ChipId driver

On Monday 05 May 2014 10:34:02 Rob Herring wrote:
> 
> > Ideally this should be done by slightly restructuring the DT
> > source to make all on-chip devices appear below the soc node.
> > We'd have to think a bit about how to best do this while
> > preserving compatibility with existing dts files.
> 
> I don't agree. How is a block with chip ID info the parent of all the
> other devices?
> 
> In doing some work to move default of_platform_populate out of
> platforms, I noticed that most platforms using the soc device are
> making it the parent of platform devices. I think this is either wrong
> or all platforms should have a default soc device. It makes little
> sense for some platforms to have a devices under a soc sysfs directory
> while others do not. Or the location changes when a platform latter
> adds the soc device.

We had a long discussion about this when we introduced the drivers/soc
framework. The intention is that the /sys/devices/soc* node is meant to
describe the SoC in its entirety, the same way you have a pci0000:00 node
as the root of all PCI devices of the first pci host bridge on a PC
system. This also reflects the reality of a SoC, which normally has one
bus that the CPU is connected to and that has all the other devices as
children.

Having the chipid registers as part of the top-level bus should not
be interpreted as having the other devices as children of the chipid
device, but rather the chipid registers as a property of the soc itself
as opposed to a random device that happens to be part of the soc.

	Arnd
--
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

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ