linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 6/9] arm64: dts: qcom: sc7280: Update reserved memory map

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:   Fri, 30 Jul 2021 13:24:58 -0500
From:   Bjorn Andersson <bjorn.andersson@...aro.org>
To:     Sibi Sankar <sibis@...eaurora.org>
Cc:     Matthias Kaehlcke <mka@...omium.org>, robh+dt@...nel.org,
        will@...nel.org, saiprakash.ranjan@...eaurora.org, ohad@...ery.com,
        agross@...nel.org, mathieu.poirier@...aro.org,
        robin.murphy@....com, joro@...tes.org, p.zabel@...gutronix.de,
        linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org, linux-remoteproc@...r.kernel.org,
        devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, evgreen@...omium.org,
        dianders@...omium.org, swboyd@...omium.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 6/9] arm64: dts: qcom: sc7280: Update reserved memory map

On Wed 30 Jun 15:02 CDT 2021, Sibi Sankar wrote:

> On 2021-06-28 23:41, Matthias Kaehlcke wrote:
> > On Fri, Jun 25, 2021 at 01:17:35AM +0530, Sibi Sankar wrote:
> > 
> > > Subject: arm64: dts: qcom: sc7280: Update reserved memory map
> > 
> > That's very vague. Also personally I'm not a fan of patches that touch
> > SoC and board files with a commit message that only mentions the SoC, as
> > is frequently done for IDP boards. Why not split this in (at least) two,
> > one for adding the missing memory regions to the SoC, and one for the
> > IDP.
> > 
> 
> sure will split this up.
> 
> > > Add missing regions and remove unused regions from the reserved memory
> > > map, as described in version 1.
> > 
> > What is this 'version 1'?
> 
> lol, it's the memory map version number
> and it's not entirely internal to qc so
> we have been mentioning them in commit
> messages from older SoCs. I'll just drop
> it when I re-spin the series since it
> doesn't add much value.
> 

Every now and then we run into issues with the reserved-memory layout,
where knowing were the numbers comes from is useful information to have
in order to characterize the issue and come up with a fix.

So including information about where those numbers came from is useful,
even if it's referencing a version of a document that's not public.

Regards,
Bjorn