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
| ||
|
Date: Mon, 09 Feb 2015 13:27:58 -0800 From: Laura Abbott <lauraa@...eaurora.org> To: "arnd@...db.de" <arnd@...db.de>, Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>, Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@....com> CC: devicetree@...r.kernel.org, Laurent Pinchart <laurent.pinchart+renesas@...asonboard.com>, Joreg Roedel <joro@...tes.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, iommu@...ts.linux-foundation.org, Grant Likely <grant.likely@...aro.org>, Mitchel Humpherys <mitchelh@...eaurora.org>, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, Marek Szyprowski <m.szyprowski@...sung.com> Subject: Re: [PATCH/RFC 0/4] Probe deferral for IOMMU DT integration On 2/7/2015 2:41 PM, arnd@...db.de wrote: > Laura Abbott <lauraa@...eaurora.org> hat am 6. Februar 2015 um 01:31 > geschrieben: >> >> The requirement for this is based on a previous patch to add clock >> support to the ARM SMMU driver[2]. Once we have clock support, it's >> possible that the driver itself may need to be defered which breaks >> a bunch of assumptions about how SMMU probing is supposed to work. > > Hi Laura, > > I was hoping that we would not need this, and instead treat the iommu in > the same way as timers and SMP initialization, both > of which need to be run early at boot time but may rely on clock controllers > to be initialized first. > > Is there a specific requirement that makes this impossible here, or is your > intention to solve the problem more nicely by allowing deferred probing > over forcing the input clocks of the iommu to be early? > > Arnd > The current clock driver for qcom targets doesn't support the early initialization needed for timers and SMP because neither of those depend on the clocksources. I discussed this with Stephen some and adding the early support would not mesh well with the device/driver design of the current clock driver so that's not really an option right now. I do think the deferred probing design is cleaner. Even cleaner would be a proper bus type but that's a different can of worms. Thanks, Laura -- Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum, a Linux Foundation Collaborative Project -- 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