linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH 0/4] Add ACPI support for HiSilicon PCIe Host Controllers

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: <7297343.ktGck3KQJN@wuerfel>
Date:	Mon, 08 Feb 2016 14:55:11 +0100
From:	Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
To:	linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org
Cc:	Gabriele Paoloni <gabriele.paoloni@...wei.com>,
	"Lorenzo.Pieralisi@....com" <Lorenzo.Pieralisi@....com>,
	"jcm@...hat.com" <jcm@...hat.com>,
	"tn@...ihalf.com" <tn@...ihalf.com>,
	"linux-pci@...r.kernel.org" <linux-pci@...r.kernel.org>,
	Linuxarm <linuxarm@...wei.com>,
	"xuwei (O)" <xuwei5@...ilicon.com>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org" <linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org>,
	"Wangzhou (B)" <wangzhou1@...ilicon.com>,
	"liudongdong (C)" <liudongdong3@...wei.com>,
	"Guohanjun (Hanjun Guo)" <guohanjun@...wei.com>,
	"bhelgaas@...gle.com" <bhelgaas@...gle.com>,
	zhangjukuo <zhangjukuo@...wei.com>,
	"Liguozhu (Kenneth)" <liguozhu@...ilicon.com>,
	qiujiang <qiujiang@...wei.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 0/4] Add ACPI support for HiSilicon PCIe Host Controllers

On Monday 08 February 2016 13:17:58 Gabriele Paoloni wrote:
> 
> Now I have removed the dependency from designware but I still think
> the best location for the code is in "drivers/pci/host/":
> the ACPI quirks share the config read/write functions with the DT
> driver, moreover for other hosts in future I think it makes sense
> to stay in "drivers/pci/host/" as they could even share more init
> code with their respective DT versions...

I haven't really followed what is going on with ACPI. Do you expect
to see future machines come out that are not just implementing SBSA
but that still need to run ACPI? I thought this was just a hack
for some early machines that only run with ACPI but are not actually
compliant.

	Arnd