linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 09/20] SEAD3: Probe parallel flash via DT

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <5bc9f3b2-e37b-1d07-730b-972e19d83b06@cogentembedded.com>
Date:	Tue, 9 Aug 2016 16:23:40 +0300
From:	Sergei Shtylyov <sergei.shtylyov@...entembedded.com>
To:	Paul Burton <paul.burton@...tec.com>, linux-mips@...ux-mips.org,
	Ralf Baechle <ralf@...ux-mips.org>
Cc:	devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
	Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 09/20] SEAD3: Probe parallel flash via DT

Hello.

On 08/09/2016 03:35 PM, Paul Burton wrote:

> Probe the system parallel flash using device tree rather than platform
> code, in order to reduce the amount of the latter.
>
> Signed-off-by: Paul Burton <paul.burton@...tec.com>
> ---
>
>  arch/mips/boot/dts/mti/sead3.dts     | 17 +++++++++++++++++
>  arch/mips/mti-sead3/sead3-platform.c | 37 ------------------------------------
>  2 files changed, 17 insertions(+), 37 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/arch/mips/boot/dts/mti/sead3.dts b/arch/mips/boot/dts/mti/sead3.dts
> index 66f7947..7799826 100644
> --- a/arch/mips/boot/dts/mti/sead3.dts
> +++ b/arch/mips/boot/dts/mti/sead3.dts
> @@ -67,6 +67,23 @@
>  		interrupts = <0>; /* GIC 0 or CPU 6 */
>  	};
>
> +	pflash@...00000 {

    What's "pflash"? I'd suggest to just name the ndoe "flash@..." to be more 
in line with ePAPR.

> +		compatible = "intel,28f128j3", "cfi-flash";
> +		reg = <0x1c000000 0x2000000>;
> +		#address-cells = <1>;
> +		#size-cells = <1>;
> +
> +		user-fs@0 {
> +			label = "User FS";
> +			reg = <0x0 0x1fc0000>;
> +		};
> +
> +		board-config@...000 {
> +			label = "Board Config";
> +			reg = <0x1fc0000 0x40000>;
> +		};

    Doesn't MTD code complain that the partitions are not subnodes of a 
"partitions" node?
It's the preferred way now...

> +	};
> +
>  	/* UART connected to FTDI & miniUSB socket */
>  	uart0: uart@...00900 {
>  		compatible = "ns16550a";
[...]

MBR, Sergei