linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 00/13] arm64: Allwinner A64 support based on sunxi-ng

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: <20160801141139.f8458f31c6c7b5c081653a93@free.fr>
Date:	Mon, 1 Aug 2016 14:11:39 +0200
From:	Jean-Francois Moine <moinejf@...e.fr>
To:	Chen-Yu Tsai <wens@...e.org>
Cc:	André Przywara <andre.przywara@....com>,
	Maxime Ripard <maxime.ripard@...e-electrons.com>,
	Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
	Mike Turquette <mturquette@...libre.com>,
	Stephen Boyd <sboyd@...eaurora.org>,
	devicetree <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
	linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	linux-arm-kernel <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
	linux-clk <linux-clk@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/13] arm64: Allwinner A64 support based on sunxi-ng

On Mon, 1 Aug 2016 20:01:49 +0800
Chen-Yu Tsai <wens@...e.org> wrote:

> On Mon, Aug 1, 2016 at 8:00 PM, Jean-Francois Moine <moinejf@...e.fr> wrote:
> > On Mon, 1 Aug 2016 17:13:34 +0800
> > Chen-Yu Tsai <wens@...e.org> wrote:
> >
> >> > But I don't see why you are keeping the simple-gates. The bus gate may
> >> > be ungated/gated when the clock is enabled/disabled, and that's what
> >> > Allwinner's software does.
> >>
> >> For peripherals that have a separate mod clock, having them separate
> >> is a good thing. One example might be the audio codecs. You could ungate
> >> the bus gate to access its registers to program it, but only enable
> >> the mod clock when you actually play something.
> >
> > The roles of the bus gate and the clock gate are the same. I don't see
> > any reason to set one gate without setting the other one. More, the
> > spec says what the bus gate must be enabled before the clock gate (and
> > reverse order while disabling). So, setting both gates in one function
> > call seems safer.
> 
> Wha? Aren't bus gates and clock gates the same thing in this context?

Yes. What is the problem?

-- 
Ken ar c'hentañ	|	      ** Breizh ha Linux atav! **
Jef		|		http://moinejf.free.fr/