linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/2] of: base: add support to get machine model name

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: <55e27115-421e-b67b-eb7a-9b1c3d662711@arm.com>
Date:   Mon, 21 Nov 2016 16:23:00 +0000
From:   Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@....com>
To:     Frank Rowand <frowand.list@...il.com>
Cc:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
        Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@....com>,
        Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>, devicetree@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] of: base: add support to get machine model name



On 21/11/16 16:05, Frank Rowand wrote:
> Hi Sudeep,
>
> On 11/18/16 12:22, Frank Rowand wrote:
>> On 11/18/16 02:41, Sudeep Holla wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> On 17/11/16 21:00, Frank Rowand wrote:
>>>> On 11/17/16 07:32, Sudeep Holla wrote:
>>>>> Currently platforms/drivers needing to get the machine model name are
>>>>> replicating the same snippet of code. In some case, the OF reference
>>>>> counting is either missing or incorrect.
>>>>>
>>>>> This patch adds support to read the machine model name either using
>>>>> the "model" or the "compatible" property in the device tree root node
>>>>> to the core OF/DT code.
>>>>>
>>>>> This can be used to remove all the duplicate code snippets doing exactly
>>>>> same thing later.
>>>>
>>>> I find five instances of reading only property "model":
>>>>
>>>>   arch/arm/mach-imx/cpu.c
>>>>   arch/arm/mach-mxs/mach-mxs.c
>>>>   arch/c6x/kernel/setup.c
>>>>   arch/mips/cavium-octeon/setup.c
>>>>   arch/sh/boards/of-generic.c
>>>>
>>>
>>> Ah sorry you were not Cc-ed in 2/2, but that shows all the instances
>>> that this will be used for.
>>
>> I have not seen 2/2.  I do not see it on the devicetree list or on lkml.
>
> Can you please re-send patch 2/2?
>

Since it is based on -next, I would prefer to wait until next merge
window to resend. You should be able to check in the link I sent if
that's OK.

-- 
Regards,
Sudeep