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:	Tue, 17 Feb 2015 15:06:35 +0100
From:	Robert Abel <rabel@...-ec.uni-bielefeld.de>
To:	Roger Quadros <rogerq@...com>
Cc:	khilman@...prootsystems.com, Tony Lindgren <tony@...mide.com>,
	linux@....linux.org.uk, linux-omap@...r.kernel.org,
	Linux Kernel Maling List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/4] ARM OMAP2+ GPMC: always program GPMCFCLKDIVIDER

Hi Roger,

On Tue, Feb 17, 2015 at 2:52 PM, Roger Quadros <rogerq@...com> wrote:
> nobody stops the DT binding from specifying a large enough "gpmc,wait-monitoring-ns" value.
> The driver must use that to scale the GPMC_CLK if it doesn't fit in the GPMC_FCLK.
> This feature can come separately though. So for now I was suggesting to set the divisor to 1.
> [...]
> AFAIK "gpmc,sync-clk-ps" is not specified for asynchronous devices so it defaults to 0
> in the driver.

As you have rightly pointed out, sync-clk-ps defaults to 0, i.e.
divider 1. My solution would work for people /now/ with different
gpmc,wait-monitoring-ns requirements. Of course, in general you're
right, the driver could compute that on its own. However, this
influences sampling behavior of the GPMC, which is somewhat strange
anyway. Since I lack a proper test setup and time to experiment with
the GPMC, I'd compromise on leaving sync-clk-ps default to 0, divider
defaults to 1. If somebody feels up to implementing driver-side
GPMC_CLK scaling, they might as well nix the dependency at that point
in time. Right now, keeping the dependency seems more useful to users
than killing it right away.

> What I'm stressing on is that there shouldn't be any dependency on "gpmc,sync-clk-ps" for
> asynchronous devices. It also becomes easier to specify the wait-monitoring-ns as we don't need
> to cross reference with "sync-clk-ps".

As an aside: There shouldn't be a dependency on the FCLK for
synchronous accesses either. The GPMC driver is in a somewhat terrible
state that synchronous protocols have to specify in ns, which get
scaled by the startup FCLK period... So this wrongful dependency
doesn't make my top ten, especially since it right now would fit a use
case.

Regards,

Robert
--
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