linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] riscv: move sifive_l2

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: <20190927225304.GA18456@lst.de>
Date:   Sat, 28 Sep 2019 00:53:04 +0200
From:   Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>
To:     Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab+samsung@...nel.org>
Cc:     Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>, Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
        paul.walmsley@...ive.com, palmer@...ive.com,
        linux-riscv@...ts.infradead.org, linux-edac@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Yash Shah <yash.shah@...ive.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] riscv: move sifive_l2_cache.c to drivers/soc

On Thu, Aug 22, 2019 at 06:26:35AM -0300, Mauro Carvalho Chehab wrote:
> Em Mon, 19 Aug 2019 08:26:19 +0200
> Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de> escreveu:
> 
> > On Mon, Aug 19, 2019 at 08:09:04AM +0200, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> > > On Sun, Aug 18, 2019 at 10:29:35AM +0200, Christoph Hellwig wrote:  
> > > > The sifive_l2_cache.c is in no way related to RISC-V architecture
> > > > memory management.  It is a little stub driver working around the fact
> > > > that the EDAC maintainers prefer their drivers to be structured in a
> > > > certain way  
> > > 
> > > That changed recently so I guess we can do the per-IP block driver after
> > > all, if people would still prefer it.  
> > 
> > That would seem like the best idea.  But I don't really know this code
> > well enough myself, and I really need to get this code out of the
> > forced on RISC-V codebase as some SOCs I'm working with simply don't
> > have the memory for it..
> > 
> > So unless someone signs up to do a per-IP block edac drivers instead
> > very quickly I'd still like to see something like this go into 5.4
> > for now.
> 
> I'm wandering if we should at least add an entry for this one at
> MAINTAINERS, pointing it to the EDAC mailing list. Something like:

Sounds fine.  Can you also ACK the patch with that, as Paul mention
in another thread he wants an EDAC ACK for it.