linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] arm64: dts: Fix various entry-method properties to reflect documentation

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <CAOesGMjcs=h4DHn7coo5iixUUY2GR2wWeTyMWQ_SBE9rrPZQgg@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Fri, 24 Aug 2018 08:38:04 -0700
From:   Olof Johansson <olof@...om.net>
To:     Amit Kucheria <amit.kucheria@...aro.org>
Cc:     Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@....com>,
        ARM-SoC Maintainers <arm@...nel.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Lorenzo Pieralisi <lorenzo.pieralisi@....com>,
        Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
        Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
        Liviu Dudau <liviu.dudau@....com>,
        Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
        Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>,
        Matthias Brugger <matthias.bgg@...il.com>,
        Orson Zhai <orsonzhai@...il.com>,
        Baolin Wang <baolin.wang@...aro.org>,
        Chunyan Zhang <zhang.lyra@...il.com>,
        Michal Simek <michal.simek@...inx.com>,
        Shawn Guo <shawnguo@...nel.org>,
        Hou Zhiqiang <Zhiqiang.Hou@....com>,
        Minghuan Lian <minghuan.Lian@....com>,
        Yuantian Tang <andy.tang@....com>,
        Ran Wang <ran.wang_1@....com>,
        Fabio Estevam <fabio.estevam@....com>,
        Yuan Yao <yao.yuan@....com>, Sumit Garg <sumit.garg@....com>,
        Marc Zyngier <marc.zyngier@....com>,
        Madalin Bucur <madalin.bucur@....com>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        Li Yang <leoyang.li@....com>,
        "open list:OPEN FIRMWARE AND FLATTENED DEVICE TREE BINDINGS" 
        <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
        lakml <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
        "moderated list:ARM/Mediatek SoC..." 
        <linux-mediatek@...ts.infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] arm64: dts: Fix various entry-method properties to
 reflect documentation

On Thu, Aug 23, 2018 at 1:02 PM, Amit Kucheria <amit.kucheria@...aro.org> wrote:
> (Adding arm-soc folks)
>
> On Thu, Aug 23, 2018 at 9:01 PM, Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@....com> wrote:
>> Hi Amit,
>>
>> Thanks for fixing this.
>>
>> On Thu, Aug 23, 2018 at 02:23:29PM +0530, Amit Kucheria wrote:
>>> The idle-states binding documentation[1] mentions that the
>>> 'entry-method' property is required on 64-bit platforms and must be
>>> set to "psci".
>>>
>>> commit a13f18f59d26 ("Documentation: arm: Fix typo in the idle-states
>>> bindings examples") attempted to fix this earlier but clearly more is
>>> needed.
>>>
>>
>> In fact, I assumed I fixed things with commit 978fa436231a ("drivers:
>> firmware: psci: unify enable-method binding on ARM {64,32}-bit systems"),
>> but I was wrong. I left quite a few instances including juno dtbs.
>>
>>> Fix the cpu-capacity.txt documentation that uses the incorrect value so
>>> we don't get copy-paste errors like these. Clarify the language in
>>> idle-states.txt by removing the reference to the psci bindings that
>>> might be causing this confusion.
>>>
>>> Finally, fix devicetrees of various boards to reflect current
>>> documentation.
>>>
>>> [1] Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/idle-states.txt (see
>>> idle-states node)
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Amit Kucheria <amit.kucheria@...aro.org>
>>> ---
>>>  Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/cpu-capacity.txt | 2 +-
>>>  Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/idle-states.txt  | 4 ++--
>>>  arch/arm64/boot/dts/arm/juno-r1.dts                    | 2 +-
>>>  arch/arm64/boot/dts/arm/juno-r2.dts                    | 2 +-
>>>  arch/arm64/boot/dts/arm/juno.dts                       | 2 +-
>>
>> For all the above files,
>>
>> Acked-by: Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@....com>
>
> Thanks for reviewing, Sudeep.
>
>> How do you plan to merge ? I prefer if you can send it via arm-soc as
>> fixes for this cycle with all the necessary acks. Otherwise you may have
>> to split this to send via platform maintainers which is bit mundane.
>
> I was hoping to get this merged thru arm-soc tree instead of creating
> a patch per platform. But if anybody feels strongly about it, I'm
> happy to split them up and feed it through the platform maintainer
> trees.

Given that we're at the tail end of the merge window, before -rc1,
it's easiest if we just take it directly and platform maintainers base
their new contents on top of it.

Applying to our next/late (i.e. merge-window-fixes) branch now.


-Olof