[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAD=FV=URg=vQbOqkg57Uujs4UWv8OKEjY+3Rx=7jbgab5pgoBQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 10 Sep 2014 10:19:28 -0700
From: Doug Anderson <dianders@...omium.org>
To: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>
Cc: Christopher Covington <cov@...eaurora.org>,
Lorenzo Pieralisi <Lorenzo.Pieralisi@....com>,
Russell King <linux@....linux.org.uk>,
Catalin Marinas <Catalin.Marinas@....com>,
Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@...aro.org>,
Stephen Boyd <sboyd@...eaurora.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Will Deacon <Will.Deacon@....com>,
Sudeep Holla <Sudeep.Holla@....com>,
Olof Johansson <olof@...om.net>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Sonny Rao <sonnyrao@...omium.org>,
"linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org"
<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] clocksource: arch_timer: Fix code to use physical timers
when requested
Mark,
On Wed, Sep 10, 2014 at 8:55 AM, Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com> wrote:
> That's not true in general as other secure initialization will still be
> necessary, and the extent and character of that initialization is going
> to be implementation specific.
Can you give more examples of what you mean by implementation
specific? Does this mean that secure initialization will be different
for every SoC out there? ...or is it just different for different ARM
cores?
-Doug
--
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