linux-kernel - Re: [PATCHv2 2/5] arm: mvebu: support for SMP on 98DX3336 SoC

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:   Thu, 5 Jan 2017 20:49:49 +0000
From:   Chris Packham <Chris.Packham@...iedtelesis.co.nz>
To:     Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>,
        "linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org" 
        <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>
CC:     Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
        Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
        Jason Cooper <jason@...edaemon.net>,
        Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>,
        "Gregory Clement" <gregory.clement@...e-electrons.com>,
        Sebastian Hesselbarth <sebastian.hesselbarth@...il.com>,
        Russell King <linux@...linux.org.uk>,
        Geert Uytterhoeven <geert+renesas@...der.be>,
        Chris Brand <chris.brand@...adcom.com>,
        Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@....com>,
        Jayachandran C <jchandra@...adcom.com>,
        Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@....com>,
        "devicetree@...r.kernel.org" <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCHv2 2/5] arm: mvebu: support for SMP on 98DX3336 SoC

On 05/01/17 17:46, Chris Packham wrote:
> On 05/01/17 17:04, Florian Fainelli wrote:
>> Le 01/04/17 à 19:36, Chris Packham a écrit :
>>> +}
>>> +
>>> +static int __init mv98dx3236_resume_init(void)
>>> +{
>>> +	struct device_node *np;
>>> +	struct resource res;
>>> +	int ret = 0;
>>> +
>>> +	np = of_find_matching_node(NULL, of_mv98dx3236_resume_table);
>>> +	if (!np)
>>> +		return 0;
>>
>> Can't this function be implemented as a smp_ops::smp_init_cpus instead
>> of having this initialization done at arch_initcall time?
>>
>
> I'll look into it. My initial reaction is no because I still need
> armada_xp_smp_init_cpus().
>

I looked at this. I could write a mv98dx3236_smp_init_cpus() that calls 
armada_xp_smp_init_cpus() and inits the resume controller address. My 
original reason for this approach was to parallel mvebu_v7_pmsu_init. I 
won't do anything just yet but is there any downside to the current 
approach?