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, 15 Dec 2014 11:16:31 -0800
From:	Ray Jui <rjui@...adcom.com>
To:	Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
CC:	Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@...gle.com>,
	Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
	Pawel Moll <pawel.moll@....com>,
	Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
	"Ian Campbell" <ijc+devicetree@...lion.org.uk>,
	Kumar Gala <galak@...eaurora.org>,
	Grant Likely <grant.likely@...aro.org>,
	Christian Daudt <bcm@...thebug.org>,
	Matt Porter <mporter@...aro.org>,
	Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>,
	Russell King <linux@....linux.org.uk>,
	Hauke Mehrtens <hauke@...ke-m.de>,
	Lucas Stach <l.stach@...gutronix.de>,
	Scott Branden <sbranden@...adcom.com>,
	<linux-pci@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
	<bcm-kernel-feedback-list@...adcom.com>,
	<devicetree@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/4] PCI: iproc: Add Broadcom iProc PCIe driver



On 12/12/2014 9:21 AM, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> On Friday 12 December 2014 09:08:48 Ray Jui wrote:
>>
>> On 12/12/2014 4:29 AM, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
>> Doesn't Hauke's driver depends on BCMA? In that case, how does it work
>> on the SoCs that do not have the IP block to support BCMA?
>
> I hadn't realized that there are some SoCs that are not BCMA based.
> As the host controller implementation is closely related, we will
> have to come up with some solution.
>
I agree with you that we should have a common PCIe host driver which 
supports all iProc SoCs, BCM4708, BCM5301X, and some other similar SoCs.

> One way to solve this would be by turning the driver into a library
> the same way as the pcie-dw driver, and have separate front-ends
> for it for platform_device and bcma_device.
>
I'm fine with this solution, i.e., to introduce a common pcie-iproc core 
driver (just like pcie-designware) and have different front-ends 
depending on the device/bus type. If we end up deciding to go with this 
solution, I need to discuss with Hauke to come up with a plan to 
collaborate.

But before we choose to go with that route, may I ask, what is the 
purpose of tying a PCIe host driver to BCMA? What benefit does BCMA give 
us? If we have a generic platform based PCIe driver that can work on all 
iProc SoCs + BCM4708 and BCM5301X with all HW specific configurations 
taken care of by device tree, why do we still need to use BCMA?

I thought all a BCMA device here does is to auto-instantiate based on 
some register readings?
--
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