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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <7cc8258c-3a77-5387-aaa4-658761fbb0ae@gmail.com> Date: Sat, 18 Mar 2023 21:17:40 +0800 From: Jacky Huang <ychuang570808@...il.com> To: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>, Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>, krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org, Lee Jones <lee@...nel.org>, Michael Turquette <mturquette@...libre.com>, Stephen Boyd <sboyd@...nel.org>, Philipp Zabel <p.zabel@...gutronix.de>, Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>, Jiri Slaby <jirislaby@...nel.org> Cc: devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-clk@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-serial@...r.kernel.org, schung@...oton.com, Jacky Huang <ychuang3@...oton.com> Subject: Re: [PATCH 11/15] arm64: dts: nuvoton: Add initial ma35d1 device tree Dear Arnd, Thanks for your suggestion. On 2023/3/16 下午 10:17, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > On Wed, Mar 15, 2023, at 08:28, Jacky Huang wrote: >> + mem: memory@...00000 { >> + device_type = "memory"; >> + reg = <0x00000000 0x80000000 0 0x20000000>; /* 512M DRAM */ >> + }; >> +}; > In most machines, the memory size is detected by the boot loader > and filled in the dtb in memory before starting the kernel, so > you should not need two separate files here for the two common > memory configurations. On ma35d1, memory size is determined early before uboot. BL1 (MaskROM boot code) -> BL2 (arm-trust-firmware) -> BL32 (op-tee) & BL33 (uboot). The DDR was initialized in BL2 stage with a selected DDR setting, which is hard coded, including DDR size. We searched the arm64 dts and found that almost all vendors claimed memory size in board level dtsi/dts. This seems to be common. So, can we have it unchanged? > Since the machine is called 'som', I would assume that this is a > module that is integrated on another board, so more commonly one > would have a dtsi file for the som in addition to the one for the > soc, and have all the components of the module listed in this > file, while the dts file that includes the som.dtsi lists the > devices on the carrier board and enables the on-chip devices > that are connected to the outside. > > Arnd You are right, ma35d1 som have a base board, and a cpu board on it. It is a good suggestion that we should have a dtsi for som base board. Consider that we are in the initial submit, and such a dtsi will be an empty file at this stage. So, I would like to do it when peripheral drivers upstream started. Is it ok? Best regards, Jacky Huang
Powered by blists - more mailing lists