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  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]
Date:	Thu, 22 May 2014 19:04:14 +0800
From:	Barry Song <baohua@...nel.org>
To:	Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@....linux.org.uk>
Cc:	Matt Porter <mporter@...aro.org>,
	Kevin Hilman <khilman@...aro.org>, Felipe Balbi <balbi@...com>,
	Linux ARM Kernel List <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ARM: l2c: prima2: only call l2x0_of_init() on matching nodes

2014-05-22 17:33 GMT+08:00 Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@....linux.org.uk>:
> On Tue, Apr 29, 2014 at 11:40:33PM +0800, Barry Song wrote:
>> 2014-04-29 23:14 GMT+08:00 Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@....linux.org.uk>:
>> > On Tue, Apr 29, 2014 at 11:05:06PM +0800, Barry Song wrote:
>> >> 2014-04-28 22:52 GMT+08:00 Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@....linux.org.uk>:
>> >> > On Mon, Apr 28, 2014 at 10:37:09AM -0400, Matt Porter wrote:
>> >> >> The "fix" is tested against bcm281xx and bcm21664 as that is what the
>> >> >> l2c cleanup breaks in -next. As mentioned, I don't have the sirfsoc h/w
>> >> >> so this first attempt at a fix also breaks their platform. It can be
>> >> >> addressed by adding those platform specific compatibles back to the dts,
>> >> >> of course.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> I'd much prefer that the sirfsoc folks fix this...it's going to break
>> >> >> other platforms in a multi v7 build.
>> >> >
>> >> > Well, it's about time we got rid of this from platform specific code
>> >> > anyway, taking it away from platform maintainers to mess around with.
>> >> > So that's what I'm doing.
>> >> >
>> >> > It's worth noting that if you build a single zImage with exynos also
>> >> > enabled, then you also end up with an unconditional call from that
>> >> > code to l2x0_of_init() with it's own magic numbers - and that applies
>> >> > before my changes.
>> >> >
>> >> > So let's fix this properly and yank this crap from platform maintainers
>> >> > fingers.
>> >>
>> >> i mentioned dropping specific dts compatible prop will break non-csr
>> >> platforms in the mail thread "ARM: prima2: remove L2 cache size
>> >> override" and i said i was going to send v2. you said you need it
>> >> before rc6. now it has been sent, but i am sorry it is not against
>> >> next-20140424.
>> >
>> > FFS.  IT HASN'T BEEN SENT.  All that I did was drop it into linux-next
>> > so that more people would get off their fat backsides and test this
>> > fscking patch set - something which hasn't happened because no one
>> > pays attention to emails sent to mailing lists.
>>
>> so your point is people don't pay attention to your mails? or you are
>> ignored? i think that is 100% not real. i think your opinions and
>> mails are always respected as you are the chief arm linux expert.
>>
>> >
>> > I also told you that this was what I was going to do.  But... is it
>> > really on to hold up such a large patch set which impacts virtually
>> > everyone because _you_ don't have time to sort out your small special
>> > requirements - no it is not, that's just fscking selfish.
>> >
>> > Anyway, I've had it with dealing with platform maintainers, I've yanked
>> > this patch set, and I'm no longer planning to do anything with it -
>> > platform maintainers have destroyed my will to get any of this series
>> > into the kernel.
>>
>> no, i am trying to follow your suggestion to make patch set merged and
>> l2 codes cleaned.
>> i have been trying to follow your will until now, and from the beginning.
>>
>> >
>> > So, the L2 cache code is going to remain in its current state, and it's
>> > going to rot because it's _FAR_ too much effort dealing with slow people
>> > like yourselves, or people who want the series split up, or people who
>> > whinge that there aren't any acks there (WELL GET OFF YOUR FAT BACKSIDES
>> > AND SEND ME SOME IF YOU CARE ABOUT THIS - no, don't, I'm no longer pushing
>> > this series.)
>>
>> people might be "selfish", but people might have some reasons to
>> response slowly, like holiday or family issue.
>> how about taking it easy? it doesn't prove you are not respected by
>> platform maintainers.
>>
>> >
>> > This is the last time I'm going to ever try cleaning up any core ARM code.
>> > Core ARM maintanence is impossible in this environment with arm-soc split
>> > from core ARM stuff, because core ARM stuff /always/ impacts on SoC
>> > specific code.  You can't get away from that.
>> >
>> > My position in this community has been made impossible and obsolete by
>> > Linaro.  I'm at the point of walking away from this crap.
>>
>> just fix the relationship and communication, that is good enough. you
>> have done things so well, there is no reason to give up.
>
> So, just as I thought...
>
> -rc6 has now been released, and YOU have done NOTHING to resolve any of
> the issues you have with this patch set - which is precisely on track
> with how you have behaved towards this set of changes on the past - where
> you promised imformation/patches and never delivered.
>
> Well, right now I'm just not going to *care* one bit about Prima2.  If
> this patch set breaks it, tough.  You've had plenty of opportunity to
> deal with this, but instead you've chosen to just whinge about it and
> then do precisely nothing to assist.

i have no idea why you are saying this. if you checked the email, i
have sent a patch in last month.

http://www.spinics.net/lists/arm-kernel/msg327151.html

but i got no reply and you said you will not handle l2....

>
> So, Prima2 *is* going to get *broken*.  No platform or SoC is important
> enough to stand in the way of core ARM changes beneficial to the rest of
> the community.
>
> We've lost around 4 weeks testing time in linux-next because of this...
> frankly I don't give a damn right now, all I care about is getting these
> patches out of my tree and into mainline during the next merge window.
> Any issues that come up can be debugged and fixed afterwards - and the
> debugging *has* to be done by the SoC people because I don't have any
> way to test and debug it on individual SoCs.  (And Olof's test farm is
> not sufficient for diagnosis.)
>


-barry
--
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