linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH V3 2/5] arm64: dts: qcom: Add support for Crashdump collection on IPQ9574

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

Message-ID: <5c67ecd2-075a-5b0b-feb9-57570f539ee1@linaro.org>
Date:   Tue, 14 Feb 2023 10:44:12 +0100
From:   Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@...aro.org>
To:     POOVENDHAN SELVARAJ <quic_poovendh@...cinc.com>, agross@...nel.org,
        andersson@...nel.org, konrad.dybcio@...aro.org, robh+dt@...nel.org,
        krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org, lee@...nel.org,
        mturquette@...libre.com, sboyd@...nel.org,
        jassisinghbrar@...il.com, catalin.marinas@....com, will@...nel.org,
        shawnguo@...nel.org, arnd@...db.de, marcel.ziswiler@...adex.com,
        robimarko@...il.com, dmitry.baryshkov@...aro.org,
        nfraprado@...labora.com, broonie@...nel.org,
        quic_gurus@...cinc.com, linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-clk@...r.kernel.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org
Cc:     quic_srichara@...cinc.com, quic_gokulsri@...cinc.com,
        quic_sjaganat@...cinc.com, quic_kathirav@...cinc.com,
        quic_arajkuma@...cinc.com, quic_anusha@...cinc.com,
        quic_devipriy@...cinc.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH V3 2/5] arm64: dts: qcom: Add support for Crashdump
 collection on IPQ9574

On 14/02/2023 10:35, POOVENDHAN SELVARAJ wrote:
>>>> compatible = "arm,cortex-a73-pmu";
>>>> interrupts = <GIC_PPI 7 (GIC_CPU_MASK_SIMPLE(4) | IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH)>;
>  >>> @@ -95,11 +102,17 @@
>>>> #address-cells = <2>;
>>>> #size-cells = <2>;
>>>> ranges;
> *>>> -*
>  >> I don't think anything improved here - still unrelated change.
>  >>
> 
> Are you referring to the deleted line here?

Yes, the line removal does not seem related nor justified.

Best regards,
Krzysztof