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 PHC | |
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Mon, 17 Feb 2020 13:22:22 +0100 From: Marek Szyprowski <m.szyprowski@...sung.com> To: Nicolas Saenz Julienne <nsaenzjulienne@...e.de>, Stefan Wahren <stefan.wahren@...e.com>, linux-rpi-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] ARM: bcm2835_defconfig: add minimal support for Raspberry Pi4 Hi Nicolas, On 14.02.2020 16:14, Nicolas Saenz Julienne wrote: > On Fri Feb 14, 2020 at 1:25 PM, Marek Szyprowski wrote: >> On 13.02.2020 10:59, Stefan Wahren wrote: >>> On 13.02.20 08:35, Marek Szyprowski wrote: >>>> On 12.02.2020 19:31, Nicolas Saenz Julienne wrote: >>>>> On Wed, 2020-02-12 at 11:20 +0100, Marek Szyprowski wrote: >>>>>> Add drivers for the minimal set of devices needed to boot Raspberry Pi4 >>>>>> board. >>>>>> >>>>>> Signed-off-by: Marek Szyprowski <m.szyprowski@...sung.com> >>>>> Just so you know, the amount of support on the RPi4 you might be able to get >>>>> updating bcm2835_defconfig's config is very limited. Only 1GB of ram and no >>>>> PCIe (so no USBs). >>>> Yes, I know. A lots of core features is missing: SMP, HIGHMEM, LPAE, PCI >>>> and so on, but having a possibility to boot RPi4 with this defconfig >>>> increases the test coverage. >>> in case you want to increase test coverage, we better enable all >>> Raspberry Pi 4 relevant hardware parts (hwrng, thermal, PCI ...). This >>> is what we did for older Pi boards. >> Okay, I will add thermal in v2. HWRNG is already selected as module. >> Enabling PCI without LPAE makes no sense as the driver won't be able to >> initialize properly. > Agree on this. >>> SMP, HIGHMEM, LPAE are different and shouldn't be enabled in >>> bcm2835_defconfig from my PoV. >> Maybe it would make sense to also add bcm2711_defconfig or >> bcm2835_lpae_defconfig? > IMO bcm2711_defconfig if the last resort solution. I don't think you can > do bcm2835_lpae_defconfig as RPi and RPi2 SoCs don't support LPAE. Okay, if you want I can send a patch adding bcm2711_defconfig. > An > intemediate solution is being discussed here: > https://lkml.org/lkml/2020/1/10/694 Right, I also agree that multi_v7_lpae_defconfig is needed. Best would be to have both (bcm2711 for quick tests of board-dedicated kernel and multi for distributions). Best regards -- Marek Szyprowski, PhD Samsung R&D Institute Poland
Powered by blists - more mailing lists