linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v4 1/2] dt-bindings: ramoops: Inherit reserve memory property

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]

Message-ID: <343d8b2f-9b7e-85ba-6f68-13cef73e55d0@quicinc.com>
Date:   Mon, 30 Jan 2023 10:44:32 +0530
From:   Mukesh Ojha <quic_mojha@...cinc.com>
To:     Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@...aro.org>,
        <linux-hardening@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-doc@...r.kernel.org>,
        <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>
CC:     Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>, Tony Luck <tony.luck@...el.com>,
        "Guilherme G . Piccoli" <gpiccoli@...lia.com>,
        Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
        Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 1/2] dt-bindings: ramoops: Inherit reserve memory
 property



On 1/28/2023 1:34 AM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> On 27/01/2023 17:00, Mukesh Ojha wrote:
>> The reserved memory region for ramoops is assumed to be at a
>> fixed and known location when read from the devicetree. This
>> is not desirable in an environment where it is preferred the
>> region to be dynamically allocated at runtime, as opposed to
>> being fixed at compile time.
>>
>> So, update the ramoops binding by inheriting some reserve memory
>> property to allocate the ramoops region dynamically.
>>
>> Cc: Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>
>> Cc: Tony Luck <tony.luck@...el.com>
>> Cc: Guilherme G. Piccoli <gpiccoli@...lia.com>
>> Cc: Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>
>> Cc: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org>
> 
> Drop. There is no single need to store automated output of
> get_maintainers.pl in the git log forever. It can be easily re-created
> at any given time.
> 
> If you need it for your own patch management purposes, keep it under ---.
> 

Will drop, thanks.

> Additionally:
> where is patch number 2?

It was merged with 2/2 as it was not making sense to keep it as separate 
patch

-Mukesh

> 
> Best regards,
> Krzysztof
>