linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 46/58] clocksource/drivers: Add a new driver for the Atmel ARM TC blocks

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: <4c2a5425-acb4-c639-7f54-1dd933c44d03@linaro.org>
Date:   Mon, 12 Jun 2017 15:25:25 +0200
From:   Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@...aro.org>
To:     Nicolas Ferre <nicolas.ferre@...rochip.com>,
        Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>,
        "devicetree@...r.kernel.org" <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>
Cc:     Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@...e-electrons.com>,
        Alexandre Belloni <alexandre.belloni@...e-electrons.com>,
        linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 46/58] clocksource/drivers: Add a new driver for the Atmel
 ARM TC blocks

On 12/06/2017 14:54, Nicolas Ferre wrote:

[ ... ]

>> I like the 'chosen' approach with the nodes you are proposing below. Thanks for
>> the constructive suggestion. The binding description matches perfectly what we
>> are trying to achieve.
>>
>> Rob? what do you think?
> 
> I'm following this work from a distance but as we've just celebrated the
> 1st anniversary for this patch series (11 June 2016), I propose that we
> now make up our mind quickly. Everybody seem to be on the same page and
> willing to make this rework move forward.
> 
> In Microchip/Atmel we would like to actually use this TCB rework both
> internally and in our mainline work to avoid having to rely on our own
> out-of-tree implementation.
> 
> The newly-added samv7 cortex-M can't boot without this series and a use
> of our current cortex-A SoCs with TrustZone in Secure World (SWd) is not
> possible with current mainline code only. On these two examples, the
> current timer on which we rely, the PIT, is not present.
> 
> So you probably understand that more than one year without real progress
> begins to be a little bit frustrating for the AT91 users...

Nicolas,

who are you exactly blaming?

Are you surprised a 58 patches series, with a gazillion of Cc'ed people
posted awhile ago, is ignored?




-- 
 <http://www.linaro.org/> Linaro.org │ Open source software for ARM SoCs

Follow Linaro:  <http://www.facebook.com/pages/Linaro> Facebook |
<http://twitter.com/#!/linaroorg> Twitter |
<http://www.linaro.org/linaro-blog/> Blog