linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] EDAC: Add AMD Seattle SoC EDAC

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: <562692F1.1030209@amd.com>
Date:	Tue, 20 Oct 2015 14:16:01 -0500
From:	Brijesh Singh <brijeshkumar.singh@....com>
To:	Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
CC:	<brijeshkumar.singh@....com>, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
	<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-edac@...r.kernel.org>,
	<robh+dt@...nel.org>, <pawel.moll@....com>,
	<ijc+devicetree@...lion.org.uk>, <galak@...eaurora.org>,
	<dougthompson@...ssion.com>, <mchehab@....samsung.com>,
	<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
	<devicetree@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] EDAC: Add AMD Seattle SoC EDAC



On 10/20/2015 12:41 PM, Mark Rutland wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 20, 2015 at 07:36:39PM +0200, Borislav Petkov wrote:
>> On Tue, Oct 20, 2015 at 06:26:55PM +0100, Mark Rutland wrote:
>>>> Btw, how much of this is implementing generic A57 functionality?
>>>
>>> The driver is entirely A57 generic.
>>>
>>>> If a lot, can we make this a generic a57_edac driver so that multiple
>>>> vendors can use it?
>>>
>>> Yes.
>>
>> Ok, cool.
>>
>>>> How fast and how ugly can something like that become?
>>>
>>> Not sure I follow.
>>
>> In the sense that some vendor might require just a little bit different
>> handling or maybe wants to read some vendor-specific registers in
>> addition to the architectural ones.
>>
>> Then we'll start adding vendor-specific hacks to that generic driver.
>> And therefore the question how fast and how ugly such hacks would
>> become.
>>
>> I guess we'll worry about that when we get there...
>>
>> So Brijesh, if you only need generic, architectural functionality,
>> please call it arm64_edac or so and let's add it so that other arm64
>> vendors can use it too.
> 
> Please note that this is specific to Cortex-A57, not ARMv8 or aarch64.
> 
> It is an IMPLEMENTATION DEFINED feature as implemented by Cortex-A57,
> which by definition is not implemented by other CPUs. It is not provided
> by the ARM architecture.
> 
> So this cannot be arm64_edac, but could potentially be cortex_a57_edac.
> 

Yes code is generic to Cortex A57 and naming it cortex_a57_edac sounds good.

Also I will follow your suggestion and remove DT binding and use MIDR. 

> Thanks,
> Mark.
> 
--
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/