linux-kernel - Re: [PATCHv2 2/5] Documentation: dt: edac: Add Stratix10 Peripheral bindings

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

Date:   Wed, 13 Mar 2019 14:20:01 -0500
From:   Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>
To:     thor.thayer@...ux.intel.com
Cc:     Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>, Dinh Nguyen <dinguyen@...nel.org>,
        Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
        Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab@...nel.org>,
        devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-edac@...r.kernel.org,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCHv2 2/5] Documentation: dt: edac: Add Stratix10 Peripheral bindings

On Tue, Mar 12, 2019 at 2:28 PM Thor Thayer <thor.thayer@...ux.intel.com> wrote:
>
> Hi Rob,
>
> On 3/12/19 11:04 AM, Rob Herring wrote:
> > On Wed, Feb 27, 2019 at 11:27:22AM -0600, thor.thayer@...ux.intel.com wrote:
> >> From: Thor Thayer <thor.thayer@...ux.intel.com>
> >>
> >> Add peripheral bindings for Stratix10 EDAC to capture
> >> the differences between the ARM64 and ARM32 architecture.
> >
> > What's the difference? Sounds like 2 different chips, so Stratix10 or
> > s10 is not specific enough perhaps.
> >
>
> Yes, our ARM32 chips are the Cyclone5 and Arria10. The Stratix10 is
> ARM64 and I'm using S10 as shorthand for the Stratix10.

So it's really just differences between one chip and another... ARM32
vs 64 really has nothing to do with that.

>
> The ECC blocks are very similar between Arria10 and Stratix10 but there
> are differences as a result of the ARM32 vs ARM64 architecture
> differences. The major difference is how Double Bit Errors are handled.
> In the ARM32, the DBE is mapped to an IRQ. On ARM64, the DBE is mapped
> to a SError.

Okay, I guess that's why arm64 matters...

> I had started out re-using the Arria10 bindings for Stratix10 since they
> were very similar. Dinh pointed out that having separate bindings for
> ARM64 would allow separation between the architectures and make future
> changes easier.
>
> I'm unclear on the comment about being specific enough. Are you
> suggesting that I use arm64 in the binding name instead of s10? Or is
> there a better naming convention I should follow?

NM, it was me that was confused. It was that Stratix10 was already
mentioned in the doc that confused me.

Rob