linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3 8/8] ARM: realtek: Enable RTD1195 arch timer

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: <e99e40d8c95147861ab600c5d5287f8f@www.loen.fr>
Date:   Mon, 18 Nov 2019 09:27:01 +0000
From:   Marc Zyngier <maz@...nel.org>
To:     Andreas Färber <afaerber@...e.de>
Cc:     <linux-realtek-soc@...ts.infradead.org>,
        Russell King <linux@...linux.org.uk>,
        <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
        James Tai <james.tai@...ltek.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 8/8] ARM: realtek: Enable RTD1195 arch timer

On 2019-11-17 17:08, Andreas Färber wrote:
> Am 17.11.19 um 12:02 schrieb Marc Zyngier:
>> On Sun, 17 Nov 2019 08:21:09 +0100
>> Andreas Färber <afaerber@...e.de> wrote:
>>
>>> Without this magic write the timer doesn't work and boot gets 
>>> stuck.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Andreas Färber <afaerber@...e.de>
>>> ---
>>>  What is the name of the register 0xff018000?
>>>  Is 0x1 a BIT(0) write, or how are the register bits defined?
>>>  Is this a reset or a clock gate? How should we model it in DT?
>
>     ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Sorry? Do you expect me to come up with answer to these questions?

>>>
>>>  v2 -> v3: Unchanged
>>>
>>>  v2: New
>>>
>>>  arch/arm/mach-realtek/rtd1195.c | 16 ++++++++++++++++
>>>  1 file changed, 16 insertions(+)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-realtek/rtd1195.c 
>>> b/arch/arm/mach-realtek/rtd1195.c
>>> index b31a4066be87..0532379c74f5 100644
>>> --- a/arch/arm/mach-realtek/rtd1195.c
>>> +++ b/arch/arm/mach-realtek/rtd1195.c
>>> @@ -5,6 +5,9 @@
>>>   * Copyright (c) 2017-2019 Andreas Färber
>>>   */
>>>
>>> +#include <linux/clk-provider.h>
>>> +#include <linux/clocksource.h>
>>> +#include <linux/io.h>
>>>  #include <linux/memblock.h>
>>>  #include <asm/mach/arch.h>
>>>
>>> @@ -24,6 +27,18 @@ static void __init rtd1195_reserve(void)
>>>  	rtd1195_memblock_remove(0x18100000, 0x01000000);
>>>  }
>>>
>>> +static void __init rtd1195_init_time(void)
>>> +{
>>> +	void __iomem *base;
>>> +
>>> +	base = ioremap(0xff018000, 4);
>>> +	writel(0x1, base);
>>> +	iounmap(base);
>>> +
>>> +	of_clk_init(NULL);
>>> +	timer_probe();
>>> +}
>>
>> Gawd... Why isn't this set from the bootloader? By the time the 
>> kernel
>> starts, everything should be up and running. What is it going to do
>> when you kexec? Shouldn't this be a read/modify/write sequence?
>
> Again, I can't comment on why their BSP bootloaders don't do things 
> the
> expected way. The list of issues is long, and the newest U-Boot I've
> seen for RTD1395 was v2015.07 based, still downstream and pre-EBBR.
> And before we get a .dts merged into the kernel with all needed nodes
> (network, eMMC, etc.), there is zero chance of a mainline U-Boot 
> anyway.

[...]

I certainly dispute that. If you're able to support all of this in the
kernel, you're most probably able to do it in u-boot, and that's the 
right
place to do it (and that can be a pretty simple u-boot if you use the
original one as a first-stage loader).

I'm not trying to undermine your effort in supporting these platforms
in mainline. This is certainly commendable. But you're unfortunately
pushing in a direction that we've tried hard to move away from for
a good 8 years.

Look at what we did on the Allwinner front: we got a terrible piece of
crap, and turned it into one of the best supported platform, because
we've put the effort where it mattered. I personally wrote PSCI support
and HYP enablement in u-boot, addressing in one go most of the issues 
you
mention here. It didn't take that much time, and it is now there for 
you
to make use of.

Thanks,

         M.
-- 
Jazz is not dead. It just smells funny...