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
| ||
|
Date: Thu, 17 Mar 2022 20:25:12 +0000 From: Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@....com> To: Kuldeep Singh <singh.kuldeep87k@...il.com>, Marc Zyngier <maz@...nel.org>, Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@...aro.org>, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>, Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>, Marc Zyngier <marc.zyngier@....com>, Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com> Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/3] dt-bindings: timer: Document arm, cortex-a7-timer in arch timer On 2022-03-17 19:15, Kuldeep Singh wrote: > Renesas RZ/N1D platform uses compatible "arm,cortex-a7-timer" in > conjugation with "arm,armv7-timer". Since, initial entry is not > documented, it start raising dtbs_check warnings. > > ['arm,cortex-a7-timer', 'arm,armv7-timer'] is too long > 'arm,cortex-a7-timer' is not one of ['arm,armv7-timer', 'arm,armv8-timer'] > 'arm,cortex-a7-timer' is not one of ['arm,cortex-a15-timer'] > > Document this compatible to address it. The motivation to add this > change is taken from an already existing entry "arm,cortex-a15-timer". > Please note, this will not hurt any arch timer users. Eh, if it's never been documented or supported, I say just get rid of it. The arch timer interface is by definition part of a CPU, and we can tell what the CPU is by reading its ID registers. Indeed that's how the driver handles the non-zero number of CPU-specific errata that already exist - we don't need compatibles for that. In some ways it might have been nice to have *SoC-specific* compatibles given the difficulty some integrators seem to have had in wiring up a stable count *to* the interface, but it's not like they could be magically added to already-deployed DTs after a bug is discovered, and nor could we have mandated them from day 1 just in case and subsequently maintained a binding that is just an ever-growing list of every SoC. Oh well. Robin. > Signed-off-by: Kuldeep Singh <singh.kuldeep87k@...il.com> > --- > Documentation/devicetree/bindings/timer/arm,arch_timer.yaml | 1 + > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+) > > diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/timer/arm,arch_timer.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/timer/arm,arch_timer.yaml > index ba2910f0a7b2..ea390e5df71d 100644 > --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/timer/arm,arch_timer.yaml > +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/timer/arm,arch_timer.yaml > @@ -26,6 +26,7 @@ properties: > - arm,armv8-timer > - items: > - enum: > + - arm,cortex-a7-timer > - arm,cortex-a15-timer > - const: arm,armv7-timer >
Powered by blists - more mailing lists