linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] mips: ralink: introduce commonly used remap node function

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20230621140822.GC7206@alpha.franken.de>
Date:   Wed, 21 Jun 2023 16:08:22 +0200
From:   Thomas Bogendoerfer <tsbogend@...ha.franken.de>
To:     Shiji Yang <yangshiji66@...look.com>
Cc:     linux-mips@...r.kernel.org, john@...ozen.org,
        matthias.bgg@...il.com, angelogioacchino.delregno@...labora.com,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mediatek@...ts.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mips: ralink: introduce commonly used remap node function

On Tue, Jun 20, 2023 at 07:44:32PM +0800, Shiji Yang wrote:
> The ralink_of_remap() function is repeated several times on SoC specific
> source files. They have the same structure, but just differ in compatible
> strings. In order to make commonly use of these codes, this patch
> introduces a newly designed mtmips_of_remap_node() function to match and
> remap all supported system controller and memory controller nodes.
> 
> Build and run tested on MT7620 and MT7628.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Shiji Yang <yangshiji66@...look.com>
> ---
>  arch/mips/ralink/common.h |  2 --
>  arch/mips/ralink/mt7620.c |  9 ---------
>  arch/mips/ralink/mt7621.c |  9 ---------
>  arch/mips/ralink/of.c     | 42 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-------
>  arch/mips/ralink/rt288x.c |  9 ---------
>  arch/mips/ralink/rt305x.c |  9 ---------
>  arch/mips/ralink/rt3883.c |  9 ---------
>  7 files changed, 35 insertions(+), 54 deletions(-)

applied to mips-next.

Thomas.

-- 
Crap can work. Given enough thrust pigs will fly, but it's not necessarily a
good idea.                                                [ RFC1925, 2.3 ]