linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 31/36] coresight: stm: ACPI support for parsing stimulus base

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: <bc8290d9-f1e7-6824-7d08-2427cdd56a13@arm.com>
Date:   Thu, 25 Apr 2019 17:17:23 +0100
From:   Suzuki K Poulose <suzuki.poulose@....com>
To:     mathieu.poirier@...aro.org
Cc:     linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        coresight@...ts.linaro.org, mike.leach@...aro.org,
        rjw@...ysocki.net, robert.walker@....com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 31/36] coresight: stm: ACPI support for parsing
 stimulus base



On 23/04/2019 18:59, Mathieu Poirier wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 15, 2019 at 05:04:14PM +0100, Suzuki K Poulose wrote:
>> The stimulus base for STM device must be listed as the second memory
>> resource, followed by the programming base address as described in
>> "Section 2.3 Resources" in ACPI for CoreSightTM 1.0 Platform Design
>> documen (DEN0067).
> 
> Thank you for adding more information.
> 
>>
>> Add support for parsing the information for ACPI.


> 
> I would copy the description in the changelog just before the
> list_for_each_entry() loop.
> 


>>   static int stm_get_stimulus_area(struct device *dev, struct resource *res)
>>   {
>>   	if (dev->of_node)
> 
> I noticed the direct access of ->of_node in patch 16 and thought it was a little
> odd that is_of_node() wasn't used.
> 
>>   		return of_stm_get_stimulus_area(dev, res);
>> +	else if (is_acpi_node(dev->fwnode))
>> +		return acpi_stm_get_stimulus_area(dev, res);
>>   	return -ENOENT;
> 
> With the above:

Both addressed.

> 
> Reviewed-by: Mathieu Poirier <mathieu.poirier@...aro.org>

Thanks !
Suzuki