linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v11 00/10] arm64, numa: Add numa support for arm64 platforms

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:	Sat, 20 Feb 2016 11:39:59 +0100
From:	Robert Richter <robert.richter@...iumnetworks.com>
To:	Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel@...aro.org>
CC:	David Daney <ddaney.cavm@...il.com>,
	Grant Likely <grant.likely@...aro.org>,
	Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
	Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>,
	"linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org" 
	<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
	Pawel Moll <pawel.moll@....com>,
	Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
	Ian Campbell <ijc+devicetree@...lion.org.uk>,
	Kumar Gala <galak@...eaurora.org>,
	"devicetree@...r.kernel.org" <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
	Frank Rowand <frowand.list@...il.com>,
	Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
	Matt Fleming <matt@...eblueprint.co.uk>,
	"linux-efi@...r.kernel.org" <linux-efi@...r.kernel.org>,
	Ganapatrao Kulkarni <gkulkarni@...iumnetworks.com>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	David Daney <david.daney@...ium.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v11 00/10] arm64, numa: Add numa support for arm64
 platforms

On 20.02.16 09:20:05, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
> On 20 February 2016 at 02:13, David Daney <ddaney.cavm@...il.com> wrote:
> > From: David Daney <david.daney@...ium.com>
> >
> > v11:
> >         - Dropped cleanup patches for other architectures, they will be
> >           submitted as a separate set after more testing.
> >
> >         - Added patch set from Ard Biesheuvel that are needed to make
> >           the whole thing actually work.  Previously this was a
> >           separate set.
> >
> 
> This series is out of date, unfortunately. The EFI init code is now
> (as of v4.5-rc1) shared between ARM and arm64, which means that any
> changes you make must be made on both sides. This applies to the split
> between parsing the EFI dt nodes and performing the actual EFI init,
> but also to the early_init_dt_add_memory_arch() changes. I am happy to
> have a go at this, but first I need a clear statement from whoever
> maintains that area that keeping memory nodes *just* for the
> annotations (and otherwise ignore them) is the way forward (Rob?
> Grant?)

Wasn't there the approach to check for consistency between efi tables
and devicetree? Thus, DT is actually not ignored but rather checked if
it is in sync with efi tables.

-Robert