linux-kernel - Re: [linux-sunxi] Re: [PATCH 1/2] dmaengine: sun6i: make gate bit in sun8i's DMA engines a common quirk

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: <20170615035407.GM13020@localhost>
Date:   Thu, 15 Jun 2017 09:24:08 +0530
From:   Vinod Koul <vinod.koul@...el.com>
To:     Maxime Ripard <maxime.ripard@...e-electrons.com>
Cc:     Icenowy Zheng <icenowy@...c.io>,
        linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, Chen-Yu Tsai <wens@...e.org>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-sunxi@...glegroups.com,
        Icenowy Zheng <icenowy@...c.xyz>, dmaengine@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [linux-sunxi] Re: [PATCH 1/2] dmaengine: sun6i: make gate bit in
 sun8i's DMA engines a common quirk

On Wed, Jun 14, 2017 at 11:04:39AM +0200, Maxime Ripard wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 14, 2017 at 02:15:29PM +0530, Vinod Koul wrote:
> > > SoC info is in compatible, so there's no reason to make it a property.
> > 
> > that's why it would need to be optional for the SoC's that needs these..
> 
> There's nothing optional about that behaviour, it's mandatory for the
> SoC that need it, and useless on the SoC that don't.

And why should kernel put strings for each hw behaviour. I am expecting DT
to tell me if this SoC is a special case or not and kernel shall handle
accordingly

> Plus, that would require changing the DT binding, which isn't
> something we can do.

Any reason why bindings can't change..? I though this was support for new
SoC...

-- 
~Vinod