linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 3/4] dt-bindings: iommu/arm, smmu: add compatible string for Marvell

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20181018204801.GA2009@bogus>
Date:   Thu, 18 Oct 2018 15:48:01 -0500
From:   Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>
To:     Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@....com>
Cc:     hannah@...vell.com, catalin.marinas@....com, will.deacon@....com,
        corbet@....net, joro@...tes.org, gregory.clement@...tlin.com,
        mark.rutland@....com, jason@...edaemon.net, andrew@...n.ch,
        sebastian.hesselbarth@...il.com, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-doc@...r.kernel.org, omrii@...vell.com,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, nadavh@...vell.com,
        iommu@...ts.linux-foundation.org, thomas.petazzoni@...tlin.com,
        linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, nd@....com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/4] dt-bindings: iommu/arm, smmu: add compatible string
 for Marvell

On Mon, Oct 15, 2018 at 02:11:52PM +0100, Robin Murphy wrote:
> On 15/10/18 13:00, hannah@...vell.com wrote:
> > From: Hanna Hawa <hannah@...vell.com>
> > 
> > Add specific compatible string for Marvell usage due errata of
> > accessing 64bit registers of ARM SMMU, in AP806.
> > 
> > AP806 SOC use the generic ARM-MMU500, and there's no specific
> > implementation of Marvell, this compatible is used for errata only.
> 
> Given that, I think something more specific like:
> 
> 	"marvell,ap806-smmu", "arm,mmu-500";
> 
> would be most appropriate. Otherwise, if some future Marvell SoC were to
> ever come out with a *different* MMU-500 integration problem, you'd already
> have painted yourself into a corner.
> 
> Alternatively (or additionally), we could perhaps consider a separate
> property like "marvell,32bit-config-access", to mirror the existing handling
> of the secure integration bug.

The former please. We have learned our lesson there (though for some 
reason, that was the *only* SMMU problem in Calxeda Midway ;) ).

Rob