linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] ARM: sti: stih410-clocks: Add PROC

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20161026130022.GB12618@dell>
Date:   Wed, 26 Oct 2016 14:00:22 +0100
From:   Lee Jones <lee.jones@...aro.org>
To:     Peter Griffin <peter.griffin@...aro.org>
Cc:     linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        kernel@...inux.com, patrice.chotard@...com,
        devicetree@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ARM: sti: stih410-clocks: Add PROC_STFE as a critical
 clock

> > > > > If the clock is enabled when Linux boots, the Linux clock framework *needs*
> > > > > to assume the hardware may have been used in previous boot stages, and it should
> > > > > not attempt to disable the clock.
> > > > 
> > > > None of the boot loaders we use do this.
> > > 
> > > But the Linux kernel isn't just used by us. It is not uncommon for STB
> > > bootloaders to get information from the frontend as part of the boot process. 
> > 
> > Okay, this is the clincher.  Since we need to support non-standard
> > bootloaders, it's difficult to guarantee that the clock will be
> > disabled at boot.  For this reason, I believe that we can call this a
> > critical clock.

> That's good news as the STi maintainer already acked and applied the patch.

Matters not.  That's why we have `git rebase` and `git revert`. ;)

-- 
Lee Jones
Linaro STMicroelectronics Landing Team Lead
Linaro.org │ Open source software for ARM SoCs
Follow Linaro: Facebook | Twitter | Blog