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]
Date:   Wed, 26 Feb 2020 17:12:30 +0000
From:   James Morse <james.morse@....com>
To:     Sai Prakash Ranjan <saiprakash.ranjan@...eaurora.org>
Cc:     Andy Gross <agross@...nel.org>,
        Bjorn Andersson <bjorn.andersson@...aro.org>,
        Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
        Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
        Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
        Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab@...nel.org>,
        Tony Luck <tony.luck@...el.com>,
        Robert Richter <rrichter@...vell.com>,
        linux-edac@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org,
        Stephen Boyd <swboyd@...omium.org>,
        Evan Green <evgreen@...omium.org>, tsoni@...eaurora.org,
        psodagud@...eaurora.org, baicar@...amperecomputing.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] dt-bindings: edac: Add DT bindings for Kryo EDAC

Hi Sai,

On 24/01/2020 14:21, Sai Prakash Ranjan wrote:
> On 2020-01-16 00:18, James Morse wrote:
>> On 05/12/2019 09:53, Sai Prakash Ranjan wrote:
>>> This adds DT bindings for Kryo EDAC implemented with RAS
>>> extensions on KRYO{3,4}XX CPU cores for reporting of cache
>>> errors.

>>> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/edac/qcom-kryo-edac.yaml
>>> b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/edac/qcom-kryo-edac.yaml
>>> new file mode 100644
>>> index 000000000000..1a39429a73b4
>>> --- /dev/null
>>> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/edac/qcom-kryo-edac.yaml

>> There is also an MMIO interface which needs a base address, along with
>> the index and
>> ranges. (which may be different). The same component may use both the
>> system register and the MMIO interface.

> I have some doubts here, Where do I get this info? Will this be implementation specific?

It will be implementation specific. The ACPI spec folk have gathered some of the range of
ways people are putting this together. We should take that into account with the binding,
otherwise we end up with a 'v1' and 'v2' of the binding and have to support both.


There is a 'Beta 2' of that ACPI document. It should appear on the website at some point.
Qualcomm should have this somewhere, its called 'DEN0085_RAS_ACPI_1.0_RELEASE_BETA2.pdf.


Thanks,

James

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ