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: Wed, 11 Aug 2021 01:39:52 -0700 From: Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com> To: Jeremy Linton <jeremy.linton@....com>, linux-pci@...r.kernel.org Cc: lorenzo.pieralisi@....com, nsaenz@...nel.org, bhelgaas@...gle.com, rjw@...ysocki.net, lenb@...nel.org, robh@...nel.org, kw@...ux.com, bcm-kernel-feedback-list@...adcom.com, linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-rpi-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] PCI: brcmstb: Break register definitions into separate header On 8/10/2021 8:10 AM, Jeremy Linton wrote: > Hi, > > Thanks for taking a look at this! > > > On 8/10/21 5:07 AM, Florian Fainelli wrote: >> >> >> On 8/5/2021 2:11 PM, Jeremy Linton wrote: >>> We are about to create a standalone ACPI quirk module for the >>> bcmstb controller. Lets move the register definitions into a separate >>> file so they can be shared between the APCI quirk and the normal >>> host bridge driver. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Jeremy Linton <jeremy.linton@....com> >>> --- >>> drivers/pci/controller/pcie-brcmstb.c | 179 +------------------------ >>> drivers/pci/controller/pcie-brcmstb.h | 182 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++ >>> 2 files changed, 183 insertions(+), 178 deletions(-) >>> create mode 100644 drivers/pci/controller/pcie-brcmstb.h >> >> You moved more than just register definitions into pcie-brcmstb.h you >> also moved internal structure definitions, enumerations, etc. which >> are not required since pcie-brcmstb-acpi.c does not access the >> brcm_pcie structure but open codes accesses to the MISC_STATUS >> register instead. >> >> There are no include guards added to this file (it is debatable >> whether we should add them), and it is also not covered by the >> existing BROADCOM BCM2711/BCM2835 ARM ARCHITECTURE MAINTAINERS file >> entry. > > Sure, I will reduce the .h to just the register definitions, guard it, > and tweak maintainers to cover pcie-brcmstb*. > > >> >> Given that there can be new platforms supported by this PCIe >> controller in the future possibly with the same limitations as the >> 2711, but with a seemingly different MISC_STATUS layout, you will have >> to think about a solution that scales, maybe we cross that bridge when >> we get there. > > Yes, given I don't know what those changes are I can't predict how they > would have to be handled, or even if the platform would be a target of > the community maintaining the UEFI/ACPI port on the RPi. So punting on > that topic seems a reasonable solution at the moment. Better yet, more > of the linux community will see the advantage of the firmware interface > and this platform can utilize that method. Ideally newer platforms would support ECAM and would not require a custom quirk if nothing else, we do have discussions about that right now, although it is not clear to me how it will materialize into a product that people can buy. -- Florian
Powered by blists - more mailing lists