linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/5] arm64, thunder: Add initial dts for Cavium Thunder SoC

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: <CAOesGMjtjcgUNV8WLp6_Zbok-0zq5afg_KS8QJYp=kDVabrQvg@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Thu, 28 Aug 2014 09:31:43 -0700
From:	Olof Johansson <olof@...om.net>
To:	Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>
Cc:	Robert Richter <rric@...nel.org>,
	Catalin Marinas <Catalin.Marinas@....com>,
	Will Deacon <Will.Deacon@....com>,
	Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
	Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>, Pawel Moll <Pawel.Moll@....com>,
	Ian Campbell <ijc+devicetree@...lion.org.uk>,
	Kumar Gala <galak@...eaurora.org>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org" 
	<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
	Radha Mohan Chintakuntla <rchintakuntla@...ium.com>,
	Robert Richter <rrichter@...ium.com>,
	"devicetree@...r.kernel.org" <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/5] arm64, thunder: Add initial dts for Cavium Thunder SoC

On Thu, Aug 28, 2014 at 9:25 AM, Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com> wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 28, 2014 at 05:15:56PM +0100, Robert Richter wrote:
>> Olof,
>>
>> On 30.07.14 11:14:23, Olof Johansson wrote:
>> > On Wed, Jul 30, 2014 at 8:06 AM, Robert Richter <rric@...nel.org> wrote:
>> > > From: Radha Mohan Chintakuntla <rchintakuntla@...ium.com>
>> > >
>> > > Add initial device tree nodes for Cavium Thunder SoCs with support of
>> > > 48 cores and gicv3. The dts file requires further changes, esp. for
>> > > pci, gicv3-its and smmu. This changes will be added later together
>> > > with the device drivers.
>> > >
>> > > Signed-off-by: Radha Mohan Chintakuntla <rchintakuntla@...ium.com>
>> > > Signed-off-by: Robert Richter <rrichter@...ium.com>
>> > > ---
>> > >  arch/arm64/boot/dts/Makefile         |   1 +
>> > >  arch/arm64/boot/dts/thunder-88xx.dts | 387 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>> > >  2 files changed, 388 insertions(+)
>> > >  create mode 100644 arch/arm64/boot/dts/thunder-88xx.dts
>> > >
>> > > diff --git a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/Makefile b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/Makefile
>> > > index c52bdb051f66..f8001a62029c 100644
>> > > --- a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/Makefile
>> > > +++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/Makefile
>> > > @@ -1,3 +1,4 @@
>> > > +dtb-$(CONFIG_ARCH_THUNDER) += thunder-88xx.dtb
>> > >  dtb-$(CONFIG_ARCH_VEXPRESS) += rtsm_ve-aemv8a.dtb foundation-v8.dtb
>> > >  dtb-$(CONFIG_ARCH_XGENE) += apm-mustang.dtb
>> >
>> > Oh, and:
>> >
>> > Let's fix the mistake we made on 32-bit here (that we can't undo
>> > unless we move all dts files now, which is too much churn), and put
>> > each SoC vendor in its own subdirectory.
>> >
>> > So, please add a arch/arm64/boot/dts/cavium/ directory, add a Makefile
>> > and the dts there.
>> >
>> > We should move vexpress under arm/   and xgene under apm/ too.
>>
>> I was looking into this. It turned out that this would introduce more
>> pain than it solves. The problem with introducing vendor subdirs for
>> .dts files is that this will require also subdirs for .dtb files to
>> avoid name conflicts. This means that dtb files are no longer in a
>> single directory. Current build scripts and makefiles rely on this.
>> E.g.:
>>
>>  scripts/Makefile.lib:$(obj)/%.dtb.S: $(obj)/%.dtb
>>
>> Thus, the introduction of vendor subdirs is not easy to implement and
>> may break existing workflows. Also, no other arch has vendor subdirs.
>>
>> A solution would be to have a naming scheme for dts files which
>> requires the vendor in the file name, such as cavium-thunder-88xx.dtb.
>> Though, these long names may look a bit ugly.
>>
>> Hmm... Any thoughts?
>
> That would make it possible to search, but the number of files in one
> place might become somewhat overwelming (which I believe was Olof's
> concern).
>
> Olof, thoughts?

Yeah, on 32 bit we've got an ever-growing and very large directory
today that is becoming a headache. Carving it up in directories to
reduce plain directory size would come a long way.

I think we would catch name conflicts quickly with the automatic
builders we have today -- and it's likely that the files will have a
platform prefix anyway so it shouldn't be a big issue. I think we can
live with that.


-Olof
--
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/