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:   Wed, 22 Mar 2023 13:14:25 +0200
From:   Daniel Baluta <daniel.baluta@...il.com>
To:     Peng Fan <peng.fan@....nxp.com>
Cc:     Mathieu Poirier <mathieu.poirier@...aro.org>,
        Iuliana Prodan <iuliana.prodan@....com>,
        Peng Fan <peng.fan@....com>,
        "andersson@...nel.org" <andersson@...nel.org>,
        "shawnguo@...nel.org" <shawnguo@...nel.org>,
        "s.hauer@...gutronix.de" <s.hauer@...gutronix.de>,
        "arnaud.pouliquen@...s.st.com" <arnaud.pouliquen@...s.st.com>,
        Daniel Baluta <daniel.baluta@....com>,
        "kernel@...gutronix.de" <kernel@...gutronix.de>,
        "festevam@...il.com" <festevam@...il.com>,
        dl-linux-imx <linux-imx@....com>,
        "linux-remoteproc@...r.kernel.org" <linux-remoteproc@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org" 
        <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH V3 0/6] remoteproc: imx_rproc: support firmware in DDR

> > Second, there should always be a segment that adds the right information to the
> > TMCL.  That segment doesn't need a name, it simply have to be part of the
> > segments that are copied to memory (any kind of memory) so that function
> > rproc_elf_load_segments() can do its job.
> >
> > That pushes the complexity to the tool that generates the firmware image,
> > exactly where it should be.
>
> For i.MX8M, yes. For i.MX93, the M33 ROM needs address of storing stack/pc.
> >
> > This is how I think we should solve this problem based on the very limited
> > information provided with this patchset.  Please let me know if I missed
> > something and we'll go from there.
>
> I am not sure how to proceed on supporting the current firmware. what
> should I continue with current patchset?

I'm in favor of merging this patch as it is. Already gave my
reviewed-by tag above.

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ