linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3 2/2] ARM: EXYNOS: Use of_machine_is_compatible instead ofsoc_is

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <CAJKOXPe4cfcWOQjpwnoR56wOGwH6ezuQzWjsfYkXiMdgkd7gxQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Thu, 14 May 2015 13:37:35 +0900
From:	Krzysztof Kozlowski <k.kozlowski@...sung.com>
To:	Kukjin Kim <kgene@...nel.org>
Cc:	Krzysztof Kozlowski <k.kozlowski@...sung.com>,
	linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
	linux-samsung-soc@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz <b.zolnierkie@...sung.com>,
	Chanwoo Choi <cw00.choi@...sung.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 2/2] ARM: EXYNOS: Use of_machine_is_compatible instead ofsoc_is_exynos4

2015-05-14 11:41 GMT+09:00 Kukjin Kim <kgene@...nel.org>:
> On 05/11/15 10:27, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>> of_machine_is_compatible() seems to be preferred over soc_is_exynos4().
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <k.kozlowski@...sung.com>
>>
>> ---
>> Changes since v2:
>> 1. New patch, requested by Kukjin Kim.
>> ---
>>  arch/arm/mach-exynos/exynos.c | 2 +-
>>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-exynos/exynos.c b/arch/arm/mach-exynos/exynos.c
>> index c3bfbba3006d..5917a30eee33 100644
>> --- a/arch/arm/mach-exynos/exynos.c
>> +++ b/arch/arm/mach-exynos/exynos.c
>> @@ -179,7 +179,7 @@ static void __init exynos_init_io(void)
>>   */
>>  void exynos_set_delayed_reset_assertion(bool enable)
>>  {
>> -     if (soc_is_exynos4()) {
>> +     if (of_machine_is_compatible("samsung,exynos4")) {
>>               unsigned int tmp, core_id;
>>
>>               for (core_id = 0; core_id < num_possible_cpus(); core_id++) {
>
> Maybe we need to change the compatible for exynos4415.dtsi? because no
> exynos4 in the compatible...Applied, anyway.

It could be quite significant change and each path checking for
compatibility with exynos4 should be tested. There is no board DTS for
Exynos4415 so I am not quite convinced that we should care about it.

Best regards,
Krzysztof
--
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/