linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0/3] A64/H3/H6 R

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: <20200102092858.6n5uqymglia4t7lk@gilmour.lan>
Date:   Thu, 2 Jan 2020 10:28:58 +0100
From:   Maxime Ripard <mripard@...nel.org>
To:     Samuel Holland <samuel@...lland.org>
Cc:     Chen-Yu Tsai <wens@...e.org>,
        Michael Turquette <mturquette@...libre.com>,
        Stephen Boyd <sboyd@...nel.org>,
        linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-clk@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-sunxi@...glegroups.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/3] A64/H3/H6 R_CCU clock fixes

On Sat, Dec 28, 2019 at 08:59:19PM -0600, Samuel Holland wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I was examining the H6 BSP clock driver[1] for guidance when porting an
> AR100 firmware[2] to the H6 SoC. I found some inconsistencies between
> that code and the sunxi-ng driver.
>
> I don't have a good way to verify the first patch. Someone with an
> oscilloscope could set the divider and check the I2C/RSB frequency.
>
> Patch 2 should have no functional change.
>
> Patch 3 was verified by benchmarking. Details are in the commit message.

Applied all three, thanks
Maxime

Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (229 bytes)