linux-kernel - Re: RFC on drivers/memory vs drivers/edac memory mapping for DDR Controller

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, 3 Jan 2023 15:24:26 +0100
From:   Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@...aro.org>
To:     "Shenhar, Talel" <talel@...zon.com>, bp@...en8.de
Cc:     talelshenhar@...il.com, shellykz@...zon.com,
        linux-edac@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: RFC on drivers/memory vs drivers/edac memory mapping for DDR
 Controller

On 03/01/2023 14:47, Shenhar, Talel wrote:
> So how would you have the DT described and how would driver/s look like 
> for cases that the unit registers are split interchangeably?
> 
>>
>> You did not Cc relevant here mailing addresses (DT and Rob), so this
>> discussion might miss their feedback.
>>
>> How the drivers map IO address space is independent question and should
>> not determine the hardware description. You want to say that hardware
>> changes depending on OS? One OS means hardware is like that and on other
>> OS it's different?

BTW, you nicely skipped points of my email which are a bit
inconvenient,e.g. how you want to tie DTS and bindings to one specific
driver implementation and ignore the rest...

Best regards,
Krzysztof