linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2] dts: arm64: add CoreSight trace support for hi3660

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: <20190305010707.GA9544@leoy-ThinkPad-X240s>
Date:   Tue, 5 Mar 2019 09:07:07 +0800
From:   Leo Yan <leo.yan@...aro.org>
To:     Suzuki K Poulose <suzuki.poulose@....com>
Cc:     mathieu.poirier@...aro.org, shiwanglai@...ilicon.com,
        robh+dt@...nel.org, mark.rutland@....com, john.stultz@...aro.org,
        xuwei5@...wei.com, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
        devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        coresight@...ts.linaro.org, suzhuangluan@...ilicon.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] dts: arm64: add CoreSight trace support for hi3660

On Mon, Mar 04, 2019 at 05:29:22PM +0000, Suzuki K Poulose wrote:

[...]

> > > To support for a funnel without any register address range (we have
> > > support replicator like this mode), we also need to extend the driver
> > > drivers/hwtracing/coresight/coresight-funnel.c.
> > > 
> > > Mathieu, Mike, Suzuki, could you help confirm this is the right
> > > direction we should move forward to?
> > 
> > Leo, thanks for testing this out.  Shiwanglai, please add Suzuki and
> > myself to future revision of this set - this will help you getting a
> > timely response for your work.

Yeah, I didn't give a good example for this; just remind to Wanglai,
usually we can add maintainers' email address in the "To:" list so
this will be more friendly for email filters.

> > As Leo pointed out we already have support for replicators that don't
> > have a register map and the same thing should be done in this case.
> > But contrary to what was done for replicators, I think we should keep
> > the drivers in the same file as Russell did here[1].  That way we can
> > keep all things funnel at the same place and reduce the amount of
> > kernel configuration options.
> 
> I back that. I have already merged the static and programmable replicators
> into one and this should be out here soon. So, I back the single driver
> approach for funnels.

That's great!  Thanks for advices, Mathieu & Suzuki.

Will sync with you offline for proceeding.

Thanks,
Leo Yan