linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0/5] Driver for pxa architectures

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, 23 Mar 2015 16:04:44 +0100
From:	Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
To:	Robert Jarzmik <robert.jarzmik@...e.fr>
Cc:	linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
	Vinod Koul <vinod.koul@...el.com>,
	Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>,
	Daniel Mack <daniel@...que.org>,
	Haojian Zhuang <haojian.zhuang@...il.com>,
	dmaengine@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-doc@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/5] Driver for pxa architectures

On Monday 23 March 2015, Robert Jarzmik wrote:
> Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de> writes:
> > On Saturday 21 March 2015, Robert Jarzmik wrote:
> > as much as I like this series, I think you still have a long way to go before
> > PXA can really be multiplatform. Other parts that would need to be solved
> > include the various cpu_is_pxa*() checks in drivers, the per-board header
> > files, the way that the I/O space is mapped in the PCMCIA drivers and
> > the XIP support.
> Ah yes, now you mention it ...  And still that doesn't frighten me that much,
> and certainly much less than clocks or dma stuff. Only the headers might be
> troublesome, and pxafb will certainly be a big rework, but that's for the next
> step :)

Ok.

> As for the per-board header files, as long as they're used only within mach-pxa
> and not outside (ie. not in drivers) I must admit I don't see what might be a
> problem.

No, headers that are used only in mach-pxa (or even plat-pxa) are unproblematic.

> As for XIP support, I don't have a clear view if it's a requirement for
> multiplatform nor if it works in these builds.

It would be nice to not have to support both options: if we put pxa into
ARCH_MULTIPLATFORM, I'd like to remove the existing entry from the choice
statement at the same time.

> > I think all of them are theoretically doable, but I wasn't expecting
> > to ever get there.
> Well, that makes me a goal to reach, doesn't it ? I'll stick to optimism here,
> and we'll see within a year how far I manage to go :)

Fair enough. Any work you do on this is highly appreciated anyway,
regardless of whether you complete it or not. BTW, one thought I had
a while ago was that we can move support for any PXA machines that are
DT enabled into mach-mmp, which hopefully will be fully DT-only and
multiplatform enabled at some point, and we can keep mach-pxa for the
legacy board files if you don't succeed in converting them all.

	Arnd
--
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/