linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] ARM: debug: enable UART1 for socfpga Cyclone5

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: <20181024065152.yinlj4axprtwdzku@pengutronix.de>
Date:   Wed, 24 Oct 2018 08:51:52 +0200
From:   Uwe Kleine-König 
        <u.kleine-koenig@...gutronix.de>
To:     Dinh Nguyen <dinguyen@...nel.org>
Cc:     Clément Péron <peron.clem@...il.com>,
        Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>,
        Russell King <linux@...linux.org.uk>,
        linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ARM: debug: enable UART1 for socfpga Cyclone5

On Tue, Oct 23, 2018 at 03:35:31PM -0500, Dinh Nguyen wrote:
> 
> 
> On 10/23/2018 09:44 AM, Clément Péron wrote:
> > HI Dinh,
> > 
> > On Tue, 23 Oct 2018 at 16:04, Dinh Nguyen <dinguyen@...nel.org> wrote:
> >>
> >> Hi Clément,
> >>
> >> On 10/09/2018 06:28 AM, Clément Péron wrote:
> >>> Cyclone5 and Arria10 doesn't have the same memory map for UART1.
> >>>
> >>> Split the SOCFPGA_UART1 into 2 options to allow debugging on UART1 for Cylone5.
> >>>
> >>
> >> I'm not sure the need for this patch. Are there any cyclone5 based
> >> boards that has UART1 as the debug uart? I see that all of them are
> >> using UART0.
> > 
> > There is no upstream device with this UART used. But the board I have
> > use it, and there is no limitation to not have it available upstream
> > no ?
> > 
> 
> I see. Then I don't think the patch is applicable because none of the
> upstream devices need it. Now, if you were to upstream your board that
> uses UART1, then there will be a case for this patch. Do you agree?

I'd not say having to upstream the board is a sensible precondition for
such a patch. One of the arguments for moving ARM to dt was that this
allows to separate the machine specifics from the code. So I'd say if
Clément has a need, this is a good enough reason to take this patch.

Just my 0.02 €,
Uwe

-- 
Pengutronix e.K.                           | Uwe Kleine-König            |
Industrial Linux Solutions                 | http://www.pengutronix.de/  |