linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] ARM: vf610: Add SoC bus support for Vybrid

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]

Message-ID: <61cec15fe896133ee6e102b0242fb43d@agner.ch>
Date:	Wed, 20 May 2015 09:36:38 +0200
From:	Stefan Agner <stefan@...er.ch>
To:	Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
Cc:	linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
	Sanchayan Maity <maitysanchayan@...il.com>,
	shawn.guo@...aro.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, kernel@...gutronix.de
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] ARM: vf610: Add SoC bus support for Vybrid

On 2015-05-20 09:12, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> On Wednesday 20 May 2015 11:06:52 Sanchayan Maity wrote:
>> Implements SoC bus support to export SoC specific information. Read
>> the unique SoC ID from the Vybrid On Chip One Time Programmable
>> (OCOTP) controller, SoC specific information from the Miscellaneous
>> System Control Module (MSCM), revision from the ROM revision register
>> and expose it via the SoC bus infrastructure.
>>
>> Sample Output:
>>
>> root@vf:/sys/devices/soc0# cat soc_id
>> df63c12a2e2161d4
>> root@vf:/sys/devices/soc0# cat family
>> Freescale Vybrid VF500
>> root@vf:/sys/devices/soc0# cat revision
>> 00000013
>> root@vf:/sys/devices/soc0# cat machine
>> Freescale Vybrid
>>
> 
> I would prefer to see this as a driver in drivers/soc that registers
> to a platform device. Is there any DT node that would be a reasonable
> device to bind to?

Hm, what is a viable device? Probably the most SoC specific device in
the SoC? Currently, all three devices we read from do have a
vf610-something compatible string, hence would be SoC specific (ocotp,
ocrom and mscm-cpucfg). Probably the last is the most SoC specific...

But somehow bind to just a random device sounds wrong to me. Couldn't we
add a more specific compatible string to the soc node and bind to that?

--
Stefan
--
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/