linux-kernel - Re: [RFC] ARM: add bcm2711

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: <5db5ed47-adab-8d31-c3f7-4d7f63258e22@gmail.com>
Date:   Tue, 7 Jan 2020 10:28:01 -0800
From:   Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>
To:     Nicolas Saenz Julienne <nsaenzjulienne@...e.de>,
        Stefan Wahren <wahrenst@....net>, f.fainelli@...il.com
Cc:     mbrugger@...e.com, Russell King <linux@...linux.org.uk>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        bcm-kernel-feedback-list@...adcom.com,
        linux-rpi-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, hch@....de,
        linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [RFC] ARM: add bcm2711_defconfig

On 1/7/20 10:11 AM, Nicolas Saenz Julienne wrote:
> On Tue, 2020-01-07 at 19:06 +0100, Stefan Wahren wrote:
>> Hi Nicolas,
>>
>> Am 07.01.20 um 18:24 schrieb Nicolas Saenz Julienne:
>>> The Raspberry Pi 4 depends on LPAE in order to use its PCIe port, which
>>> is essential, as it ultimately provides USB2/3 connectivity. As this
>>> setup doesn't fit any generic purpose configuration this adds
>>> bcm2711_defconfig which is based on the current Raspberry Pi foundation
>>> config file[1] with as little changes as possible
>>
>> i really dislike the Foundation config file, because it contains so many
>> unnecessary features. Bisecting with such a kernel config is horrible.
>>
>> How about finding a compromise between bcm2835_defconfig and
>> multi_v7_defconfig + LPAE?
> 
> If there is a consensus this is the right approach (creating a new config
> file), I'll be happy to try that out.
> 
> Now that I think of it, maybe we shouldn't add bcm2711_thermal into
> multi_v7_defconfig.

It there a mechanism that can be used such that bcm2711_defconfig would
be simply a fragment that enables CONFIG_ARM_LPAE=y (and other relevant
2711 only options) and that you could easily run/test with, something like:

ARCH=arm make bcm2835_defconfig+bcm2711_defconfig

or something along those lines?
-- 
Florian