linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] dt-bindings: sifive: describe sifive-blocks versioning

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: <CABGGisyc-nLZkxtJAr5-BT4ziJO1AW6MU-4ChgBV73No67y0PA@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Fri, 7 Dec 2018 09:19:14 -0600
From:   Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>
To:     paul.walmsley@...ive.com
Cc:     devicetree@...r.kernel.org, palmer@...ive.com, megan@...ive.com,
        wesley@...ive.com, Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
        linux-riscv@...ts.infradead.org,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        paul@...an.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] dt-bindings: sifive: describe sifive-blocks versioning

On Fri, Dec 7, 2018 at 8:31 AM Paul Walmsley <paul.walmsley@...ive.com> wrote:
>
>
> On Fri, 7 Dec 2018, Rob Herring wrote:
>
> > On Thu, Dec 6, 2018 at 6:46 PM Paul Walmsley <paul.walmsley@...ive.com> wrote:
> > > On Thu, 6 Dec 2018, Rob Herring wrote:
> > > > On Wed, Nov 21, 2018 at 05:06:56PM -0800, Paul Walmsley wrote:
> > > >
> > > > >  .../sifive/sifive-blocks-ip-versioning.txt    | 38 +++++++++++++++++++
> > > > >  1 file changed, 38 insertions(+)
> > > > >  create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/sifive/sifive-blocks-ip-versioning.txt
> > > >
> > > > Use the path that was suggested.
> > >
> > > Could you remind me which one that is?
> >
> > In this thread: bindings/riscv/sifive/
>
> SiFive also produces ARM-based SoCs.  Some of those ARM SoCs may use these
> IP blocks from sifive-blocks as well.  As far as I know, there's nothing
> RISC-V-specific about most of these IP blocks.  (As an example, there's
> nothing CPU architecture-specific about a UART.)

Fair enough. As-is is fine.

Rob