linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v5 06/11] dt-bindings: watchdog: Add HPE GXP Watchdog timer binding

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] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Tue, 26 Apr 2022 15:34:39 +0200
From:   Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@...aro.org>
To:     "Hawkins, Nick" <nick.hawkins@....com>,
        Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>
Cc:     "Verdun, Jean-Marie" <verdun@....com>,
        "joel@....id.au" <joel@....id.au>, "arnd@...db.de" <arnd@...db.de>,
        "openbmc@...ts.ozlabs.org" <openbmc@...ts.ozlabs.org>,
        Wim Van Sebroeck <wim@...ux-watchdog.org>,
        Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net>,
        Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org>,
        "linux-watchdog@...r.kernel.org" <linux-watchdog@...r.kernel.org>,
        "devicetree@...r.kernel.org" <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 06/11] dt-bindings: watchdog: Add HPE GXP Watchdog
 timer binding

On 26/04/2022 15:21, Hawkins, Nick wrote:
>> How is this h/w controlled? I'm guessing it's part of the timer? If so, you don't need this node. A single node can implement multiple functions.
> 
> It is associated with the timer because of the shared register set. Based on feedback from Krzysztof I need to create a child node for gxp-timer. I therefore will remove this file and move gxp-wdt to the hpe,gxp-timer.yaml as a child node.

I have impression my feedback was about mapping entire address space,
not few registers of watchdog:
https://lore.kernel.org/all/c6309ed8-6e74-67d3-304a-f5399d16cc37@canonical.com/

However later during talks it turned out that the address space is
heavily shared.

Nick,
BTW, do you see my comments in the email I linked above? This v5 makes
the same mistake. We talked about this already, so please make note of
comments you receive and implement them.

Best regards,
Krzysztof