linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3 4/6] bus: ti-sysc: Add support for software reset

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: <20180703070743.GG112168@atomide.com>
Date:   Tue, 3 Jul 2018 00:07:43 -0700
From:   Tony Lindgren <tony@...mide.com>
To:     Faiz Abbas <faiz_abbas@...com>
Cc:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-omap@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
        linux-clk@...r.kernel.org, mark.rutland@....com, paul@...an.com,
        t-kristo@...com, robh+dt@...nel.org, bcousson@...libre.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 4/6] bus: ti-sysc: Add support for software reset

* Tony Lindgren <tony@...mide.com> [180611 07:06]:
> * Faiz Abbas <faiz_abbas@...com> [180611 06:48]:
> > Hi,
> > 
> > On Monday 11 June 2018 11:59 AM, Tony Lindgren wrote:
> > > * Faiz Abbas <faiz_abbas@...com> [180611 06:28]:
> > >> Great. I thought I completely misunderstood you. But I don't see what
> > >> adding another function will accomplish. A QUIRK flag used in the same
> > >> function would work well enough>
> > > Fine with me as long as the function stays simple for both
> > > syss and sysc reset.
> > >
> > 
> > 
> > In general a reset status bit being in sysstatus is the norm and it
> > being in sysconfig should be the "quirk" for which a flag needs to be
> > added. What do you think?
> 
> Sure makes sense to me.
> 
> > As an aside, naming bitshifts by the name of the platform they were
> > originally added in seems weird. There should be some generic mask
> > saying "soft reset is the 0th bit". Currently I am using
> > SYSC_OMAP4_SOFTRESET for a dra76x module. I guess it depends on how many
> > different sysconfig types we have.
> 
> Sure we could have a macro for that.

So what's the conclusion on this one? Are you going to do one
more version of the ti-sysc driver patch?

Regards,

Tony