linux-kernel - Re: [PATCHv2] EDAC, altera: Move Stratix10 SDRAM ECC to peripheral

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <e88c9dd7-13af-4696-c5c1-653aaa13e805@linux.intel.com>
Date:   Thu, 25 Jul 2019 18:29:04 -0500
From:   Thor Thayer <thor.thayer@...ux.intel.com>
To:     James Morse <james.morse@....com>
Cc:     bp@...en8.de, mchehab@...nel.org, linux-edac@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCHv2] EDAC, altera: Move Stratix10 SDRAM ECC to peripheral

Hi James,

On 7/25/19 7:46 AM, James Morse wrote:
> Hi Thor,
> 
> On 12/07/2019 19:28, thor.thayer@...ux.intel.com wrote:
>> From: Thor Thayer <thor.thayer@...ux.intel.com>
>>
>> ARM32 SoCFPGAs had separate IRQs for SDRAM. ARM64 SoCFPGAs
>> send all DBEs to SError so filtering by source is necessary.
>>
>> The Stratix10 SDRAM ECC is a better match with the generic
>> Altera peripheral ECC framework because the linked list can
>> be searched to find the ECC block offset and printout
>> the DBE Address.
> 
> 
>> diff --git a/drivers/edac/altera_edac.c b/drivers/edac/altera_edac.c
>> index c2e693e34d43..09a80b53acea 100644
>> --- a/drivers/edac/altera_edac.c
>> +++ b/drivers/edac/altera_edac.c
> 
>> @@ -2231,13 +2275,15 @@ static int altr_edac_a10_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
>>   		    of_device_is_compatible(child, "altr,socfpga-dma-ecc") ||
>>   		    of_device_is_compatible(child, "altr,socfpga-usb-ecc") ||
>>   		    of_device_is_compatible(child, "altr,socfpga-qspi-ecc") ||
>> +#ifdef CONFIG_EDAC_ALTERA_SDRAM
>> +		    of_device_is_compatible(child, "altr,sdram-edac-s10") ||
>> +#endif
>>   		    of_device_is_compatible(child, "altr,socfpga-sdmmc-ecc"))
> 
> I'm just curious: This list looks suspiciously like the altr_edac_a10_device_of_match[]
> list. Is there a reason it can't use of_match_device() here?
> 
Good point. Yes, it does look very much like the match list. Although 
of_match_device() doesn't fit with the available parameters (device 
pointer), your question prompted me to look closer and I noticed 
of_match_node() is perfect.

I'll create a version 3 with this change.

Thanks for reviewing!

>>   
>>   			altr_edac_a10_device_add(edac, child);
>>   
>>   #ifdef CONFIG_EDAC_ALTERA_SDRAM
>> -		else if ((of_device_is_compatible(child, "altr,sdram-edac-a10")) ||
>> -			 (of_device_is_compatible(child, "altr,sdram-edac-s10")))
>> +		else if (of_device_is_compatible(child, "altr,sdram-edac-a10"))
>>   			of_platform_populate(pdev->dev.of_node,
>>   					     altr_sdram_ctrl_of_match,
>>   					     NULL, &pdev->dev);
> 
> 
> Acked-by: James Morse <james.morse@....com>
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> James
>