linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 09/32] bcm2837-rpi-3-b.dts for 32bit arm

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: <1464880291.24775.111.camel@redhat.com>
Date:	Thu, 02 Jun 2016 17:11:31 +0200
From:	Gerd Hoffmann <kraxel@...hat.com>
To:	Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
Cc:	linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
	Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
	"open list:OPEN FIRMWARE AND FLATTENED DEVICE TREE BINDINGS" 
	<devicetree@...r.kernel.org>, Pawel Moll <pawel.moll@....com>,
	Ian Campbell <ijc+devicetree@...lion.org.uk>,
	Russell King <linux@...linux.org.uk>,
	open list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Eric Anholt <eric@...olt.net>,
	Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
	linux-rpi-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
	Kumar Gala <galak@...eaurora.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 09/32] bcm2837-rpi-3-b.dts for 32bit arm

  Hi,

> > > > Reference to ../../../arm64/boot/dts/broadcom/bcm2837-rpi-3-b.dts
> > > > directly in the Makefile?

Actually tried that, and to my surprise this worked fine for both "make
dtbs" and "make dtbs_install".

So we should just do that I guess ...

> > Yes, in theory.  No, in practice.  As far I know the rpi3 is the only
> > 64bit soc where a almost identical 32bit version exists, so running
> > 32bit kernels on a 64bit processor actually happens in practice and I
> > expect this to continue.  If you want create sdcard images which run on
> > any rpi variant this is pretty much the only reasonable way to do it.
> 
> I think the Allwinner A64 and the Samsung s5p6818 are other examples
> for this, where the initial run of boards all run 32-bit kernels
> for much of the same reasons. If users want to run a 32-bit distro
> on rpi-3 and on e.g. orange-pi, I don't see why they wouldn't also run
> the same binary on A64.

... and others can join the party on a case-by-case basis.

I still expect for the majority of arm64 boards it is not very useful,
so I don't think we should build all of them unconditionally.

cheers,
  Gerd