linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v4 00/38] platform/x86: Rework intel_scu_ipc and intel_pmc

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]

Date:   Tue, 21 Jan 2020 18:33:12 +0200
From:   Mika Westerberg <mika.westerberg@...ux.intel.com>
To:     Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
Cc:     Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>,
        Darren Hart <dvhart@...radead.org>,
        Lee Jones <lee.jones@...aro.org>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
        "H . Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, x86@...nel.org,
        Zha Qipeng <qipeng.zha@...el.com>,
        "David E . Box" <david.e.box@...ux.intel.com>,
        Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net>,
        Heikki Krogerus <heikki.krogerus@...ux.intel.com>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        Wim Van Sebroeck <wim@...ux-watchdog.org>,
        platform-driver-x86@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 00/38] platform/x86: Rework intel_scu_ipc and
 intel_pmc_ipc drivers

On Tue, Jan 21, 2020 at 04:21:57PM +0000, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 21, 2020 at 07:00:36PM +0300, Mika Westerberg wrote:
> 
> > Currently both intel_scu_ipc.c and intel_pmc_ipc.c implement the same SCU
> > IPC communications with minor differences. This duplication does not make
> > much sense so this series reworks the two drivers so that there is only a
> > single implementation of the SCU IPC. In addition to that the API will be
> 
> This is a 40 (!) patch series and looking at the subjects and diffstat I
> can't tell if there's something in particular that you're looking for me
> to review?

Sorry about that. I included you because there was suggestion from Lee
to convert the MFD driver in patch 37 to use regmap but the registers
are all 64-bit and it was not clear whether regmap supports that:

  https://www.spinics.net/lists/platform-driver-x86/msg20652.html

Looking at the regmap API it seems to deal mostly with "unsigned int"
which does not work well with the 64-bit MMIO registers but I may be
missing something.