linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] ARM: rockchip: Convert resume code to C

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]

Date:	Mon, 1 Dec 2014 15:04:59 -0800
From:	Doug Anderson <dianders@...omium.org>
To:	Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@....linux.org.uk>
Cc:	Heiko Stuebner <heiko@...ech.de>, Chris Zhong <zyw@...k-chips.com>,
	Kevin Hilman <khilman@...aro.org>,
	Sonny Rao <sonnyrao@...omium.org>,
	Tomasz Figa <tomasz.figa@...il.com>,
	"linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org" 
	<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
	"open list:ARM/Rockchip SoC..." <linux-rockchip@...ts.infradead.org>,
	russ.dill@...il.com, Olof Johansson <olof@...om.net>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ARM: rockchip: Convert resume code to C

Russel,

On Mon, Dec 1, 2014 at 2:50 PM, Russell King - ARM Linux
<linux@....linux.org.uk> wrote:
> What I see here is a load of complexity which achieves very little.
> The result doesn't get rid of much assembly, but it does make stuff
> more complicated.  And the diffstat speaks volumes about this:
>
>  10 files changed, 275 insertions(+), 94 deletions(-)
>
> There's a lot of words in the description, but it's missing the most
> important bit: why do we want to take this approach - what benefits
> does it bring?

Sure.  I guess the most important words in the description are:

> We convert the existing assembly resume code into C as proof that this
> works and to prepare for linking in SDRAM reinit code.

I can't say that the SDRAM reinit code is ready for prime time yet,
but you can get a preview of what it could look like at:

https://chromium-review.googlesource.com/#/c/227366/25/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/embedded/rk3288_ddr_resume.c

Adding that code in assembly seems like a very, very bad idea.
Certainly my patch could wait until the DDR code is ready to be posted
upstream if that made sense.  One advantage of waiting is that it's
possible that the DDR code might end up moving elsewhere if it made
sense to have it part of a memory controller driver or something like
that.

-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/