linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH V2 13/14] dt-bindings: arm-gic: Add documentation for Tegra210 AGIC

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:	Fri, 6 May 2016 09:32:38 +0100
From:	Jon Hunter <jonathanh@...dia.com>
To:	Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>
CC:	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	Jason Cooper <jason@...edaemon.net>,
	Marc Zyngier <marc.zyngier@....com>,
	Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
	Pawel Moll <pawel.moll@....com>,
	Ian Campbell <ijc+devicetree@...lion.org.uk>,
	Kumar Gala <galak@...eaurora.org>,
	Stephen Warren <swarren@...dotorg.org>,
	Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@...il.com>,
	Kevin Hilman <khilman@...nel.org>,
	Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org>,
	Grygorii Strashko <grygorii.strashko@...com>,
	Lars-Peter Clausen <lars@...afoo.de>,
	Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>,
	<linux-tegra@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-omap@...r.kernel.org>,
	<devicetree@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH V2 13/14] dt-bindings: arm-gic: Add documentation for
 Tegra210 AGIC

Hi Mark,

On 28/04/16 10:55, Mark Rutland wrote:

[...]

> The "nvidia,tegra210-agic" string can be taken as describing any
> Tegra-210 specific integration quirks, though I agree that's also not
> fantastic for extending PM support beyond Tegra 210 and variants
> thereof.
> 
> So maybe the best approach is bailing out in the presence of clocks
> and/or power domains after all, on the assumption that nothing today has
> those properties, though I fear we may have problems with that later
> down the line if/when people describe those for the root GIC to describe
> those must be hogged, even if not explicitly managed.

On further testing, by bailing out in the presence of clocks and/or
power-domains, the problem I now see is that although the primary gic-400
has been registered, we still try to probe it again later as it matches
the platform driver. One way to avoid this would be ...

diff --git a/drivers/of/irq.c b/drivers/of/irq.c
index e7bfc175b8e1..631da7ad0dbf 100644
--- a/drivers/of/irq.c
+++ b/drivers/of/irq.c
@@ -556,6 +556,8 @@ void __init of_irq_init(const struct of_device_id *matches)
                         * its children can get processed in a subsequent pass.
                         */
                        list_add_tail(&desc->list, &intc_parent_list);
+
+                       of_node_set_flag(desc->dev, OF_POPULATED);
                }

If this is not appropriate then I guess I will just need to use
"tegra210-agic" for the compatibility flag.

Cheers
Jon