linux-kernel - Re: [PATCHv3 0/3] Devicetree bindings for Ion

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:   Mon, 12 Sep 2016 12:22:39 +0200
From:   Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To:     Laura Abbott <labbott@...hat.com>
Cc:     Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
        Frank Rowand <frowand.list@...il.com>,
        Sumit Semwal <sumit.semwal@...aro.org>,
        Andrew Andrianov <andrew@...mnt.org>, arve@...roid.com,
        Riley Andrews <riandrews@...roid.com>,
        devel@...verdev.osuosl.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
        Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>, Tom Gall <tom.gall@...aro.org>,
        romlem@...gle.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Colin Cross <ccross@...gle.com>,
        Bryan Huntsman <bryanh@...eaurora.org>,
        John Stultz <john.stultz@...aro.org>,
        Chen Feng <puck.chen@...ilicon.com>,
        Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
        linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCHv3 0/3] Devicetree bindings for Ion

On Tue, Aug 30, 2016 at 05:04:26PM -0700, Laura Abbott wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> This is a long overdue resend and slight update from the last version[1] of
> Ion devicetree bindings.
> 
> The goal here is to keep the Ion bindings minimalist. I experimented with
> dropping all but a dummy devicetree node and just matching on the machine
> name in the platform file. This ends up being a nightmare for the DMA (i.e. CMA)
> heap type. That heap requires a device structure to do its allocation and
> setting up a device structure properly isn't pretty. I have other ideas for
> working with that heap if this gets NAKed.
> 
> I've thought about the idea of a devicetree overlay for specifying more
> platform configuration but that a) requires Android actually load the overlay
> at the right time in the framework and b) opens up an entirely new can of
> worms.
> 
> In conclusion, if we assume that Ion platform support is something anyone
> actually wants, this is still the least bad and intrusive idea I've come up
> with. There exists hisilicon Ion code but it came in without being fully acked.
> I've converted it over as an example of how it might look.
> 
> As always, feedback appreciated.

Give a total lack of feeback, I've now applied these patches :)

thanks,

greg k-h