linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/2] clocksource: sp804: Add support for OX810SE 24bit timer width

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: <20160426163055.GB13887@linaro.org>
Date:	Tue, 26 Apr 2016 18:30:55 +0200
From:	Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@...aro.org>
To:	Neil Armstrong <narmstrong@...libre.com>
Cc:	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, rmk+kernel@....linux.org.uk,
	sudeep.holla@....com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] clocksource: sp804: Add support for OX810SE 24bit
 timer width

On Mon, Apr 25, 2016 at 04:48:24PM +0200, Neil Armstrong wrote:
> On 04/22/2016 09:53 AM, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> > On Fri, 22 Apr 2016, Daniel Lezcano wrote:
> > 
> >> On Fri, Apr 01, 2016 at 04:22:38PM +0200, Neil Armstrong wrote:
> >>> In order to support the Dual-Timer on the Oxford Semiconductor OX810SE SoC,
> >>> implement variable counter width, keeping 32bit as default width.
> >>> Add new compatible string oxsemi,ox810se-rps-timer in order to select
> >>> the 24bit counter width.
> >>>
> >>> Signed-off-by: Neil Armstrong <narmstrong@...libre.com>
> >>> ---
> >>>  drivers/clocksource/timer-sp804.c | 107 ++++++++++++++++++++++++--------------
> >>>  include/clocksource/timer-sp804.h |  42 ++++++++++++---
> >>>  2 files changed, 102 insertions(+), 47 deletions(-)
> >>
> >> I will take those patches but this driver really deserves a cleanup.
> > 
> > If it deserves a cleanup, then this should happen _BEFORE_ we add new
> > functionality to it.
> > 
> > Thanks,
> > 
> > 	tglx
> > 
> 
> Hi Thomas, Daniel,
> 
> Sure this driver should have a cleanup, but it still depends on old legacy vexpress calls.
> 
> The reason I submitted a change and a small cleanup over this driver is because the high
> similarities of the HW and avoiding adding a brand new driver cloning much of its
> functionalities.

Hi Neil,

it is a good idea to avoid having new drivers when it is possible to group 
them into a single one.
 
> I propose to study an eventual cleanup, but could this change be submitted for 4.7 since
> it's part of a base platform support serie ?

I am not against if the next patches you send are cleanups.

Thomas ?