linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH net-next v4 1/2] macb: Add 1588 support in Cadence GEM.

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: <CAFcVECLqnOx9cJay_2j1QPwUpE5PrLYf28Sh43D-Otz_Z35Q3w@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Tue, 3 Jan 2017 16:18:58 +0530
From:   Harini Katakam <harinikatakamlinux@...il.com>
To:     Richard Cochran <richardcochran@...il.com>
Cc:     Nicolas Ferre <nicolas.ferre@...el.com>,
        Rafal Ozieblo <rafalo@...ence.com>,
        Andrei Pistirica <andrei.pistirica@...rochip.com>,
        "netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org" 
        <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
        "davem@...emloft.net" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        "harini.katakam@...inx.com" <harini.katakam@...inx.com>,
        "punnaia@...inx.com" <punnaia@...inx.com>,
        "michals@...inx.com" <michals@...inx.com>,
        "anirudh@...inx.com" <anirudh@...inx.com>,
        "boris.brezillon@...e-electrons.com" 
        <boris.brezillon@...e-electrons.com>,
        "alexandre.belloni@...e-electrons.com" 
        <alexandre.belloni@...e-electrons.com>,
        "tbultel@...elsurmer.com" <tbultel@...elsurmer.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH net-next v4 1/2] macb: Add 1588 support in Cadence GEM.

Hi Richard,

On Tue, Jan 3, 2017 at 3:59 PM, Richard Cochran
<richardcochran@...il.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 03, 2017 at 10:36:11AM +0530, Harini Katakam wrote:
>> I understand that it is not accurate - it is an initial version.
>
> Why do you say, "it is an initial version?"
>
> The Atmel device has this IP core burned in.  The core is hopelessly
> broken, and it cannot be fixed in SW either, so what is your point?
>

I'm sorry - I just meant that this was before many necessary
enhancements and fixes.
Newer SoCs including ZynqMP (for which the original series was sent)
have the descriptor based approach which is reliable.

Regards,
Harini