linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 3/3] mtd: spi-nor: Altera Quadspi Flash Controller v2 Platform driver

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: <5f0e2ddd-d329-cb3d-01bc-c101247281a7@gmail.com>
Date:   Tue, 27 Jun 2017 18:21:43 +0200
From:   Marek Vasut <marek.vasut@...il.com>
To:     matthew.gerlach@...ux.intel.com
Cc:     vndao@...era.com, dwmw2@...radead.org, computersforpeace@...il.com,
        boris.brezillon@...e-electrons.com, richard@....at,
        cyrille.pitchen@...ev4u.fr, robh+dt@...nel.org,
        mark.rutland@....com, linux-mtd@...ts.infradead.org,
        devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        gregkh@...uxfoundation.org, davem@...emloft.net, mchehab@...nel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] mtd: spi-nor: Altera Quadspi Flash Controller v2
 Platform driver

On 06/27/2017 05:15 PM, matthew.gerlach@...ux.intel.com wrote:
> 
> 
> On Tue, 27 Jun 2017, Marek Vasut wrote:
> 
>> On 06/26/2017 06:13 PM, matthew.gerlach@...ux.intel.com wrote:
>>> From: Matthew Gerlach <matthew.gerlach@...ux.intel.com>
>>
>> Just wrap it into the Altera QSPI driver , no need for separate platform
>> driver IMO.
> 
> Hi Marek,
> 
> I answered this question when you asked why the header file was
> necessary, but I think further discussion could be helpful, since this
> problem is becoming more prevelent.  The Altera Quadspi component is a
> soft IP in a
> FPGA, and the processor using the component may or may not have device
> tree support compiled into the Linux kernel.  Since device tree support
> may or may not be available, the device tree specific code must be
> separated
> from the core driver code.

I see, that's fine, although there is no PCIe or other support in this
submission. Is that planned ?

> One can certainly make the case, that device tree support could/should
> be available everywhere, but the current reality is most x86 Linux
> kernel configurations do not include device tree support.
> 
> For the record, I believe device trees, and more specifically device
> tree overlays, are the best way for Linux to use FPGAs, but I have to
> deal with the current realities.
> 
> Thanks again for all the great feedback.
> 
> Matthew Gerlach

[...]

-- 
Best regards,
Marek Vasut