linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 09/11] RISC-V: Support per-hart timebase-frequency

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:   Fri, 3 Aug 2018 14:33:57 +0200
From:   Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>
To:     Atish Patra <atish.patra@....com>
Cc:     Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>,
        "tglx@...utronix.de" <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        "palmer@...ive.com" <palmer@...ive.com>,
        "jason@...edaemon.net" <jason@...edaemon.net>,
        "marc.zyngier@....com" <marc.zyngier@....com>,
        "robh+dt@...nel.org" <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
        "mark.rutland@....com" <mark.rutland@....com>,
        "devicetree@...r.kernel.org" <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
        "aou@...s.berkeley.edu" <aou@...s.berkeley.edu>,
        "anup@...infault.org" <anup@...infault.org>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@...belt.com>,
        "linux-riscv@...ts.infradead.org" <linux-riscv@...ts.infradead.org>,
        "shorne@...il.com" <shorne@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 09/11] RISC-V: Support per-hart timebase-frequency

On Thu, Aug 02, 2018 at 03:19:49PM -0700, Atish Patra wrote:
> On 8/2/18 4:50 AM, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
>> From: Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@...ive.com>
>>
>> Follow the updated DT specs and read the timebase-frequency from the
>> CPU 0 node.
>>
>
> However, the DT in the HighFive Unleashed has the entry at the wrong place.
>
> Even the example in github also at wrong place.
> https://github.com/riscv/riscv-device-tree-doc/pull/8/commits/2461d481329c55005fcbe684f0d6bdb3b7f0a432
>
> DT should be consistent between Documentation and the one in the hardware. 
> I can fix them in bbl & submit a bbl patch. But I am not sure if that's an 
> acceptable way to do it.

I'll need to have comments from Palmer and/or someone else at SiFive
here.  Personally I really don't care where we document the timebase,
as this patch supports both locations anywhere.  For now I'll just update
the commit log to state that more explicitly.