linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 08/10] ARM: mach-hpe: Rework support and directory structure

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: <8853b024-4f1f-4acf-ac52-6b20bbd2ba12@app.fastmail.com>
Date: Fri, 22 Dec 2023 14:21:49 +0000
From: "Arnd Bergmann" <arnd@...db.de>
To: "Andrew Davis" <afd@...com>, "Russell King" <linux@...linux.org.uk>,
 "Baruch Siach" <baruch@...s.co.il>, "Vladimir Zapolskiy" <vz@...ia.com>,
 "Kunihiko Hayashi" <hayashi.kunihiko@...ionext.com>,
 "Masami Hiramatsu" <mhiramat@...nel.org>,
 "Geert Uytterhoeven" <geert+renesas@...der.be>,
 "Linus Walleij" <linus.walleij@...aro.org>
Cc: linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 08/10] ARM: mach-hpe: Rework support and directory structure

On Mon, May 15, 2023, at 16:02, Andrew Davis wrote:
> Having a platform need a mach-* directory should be seen as a negative,
> it means the platform needs special non-standard handling. ARM64 support
> does not allow mach-* directories at all. While we may not get to that
> given all the non-standard architectures we support, we should still try
> to get as close as we can and reduce the number of mach directories.
>
> The mach-hpe/ directory and files, provides just one "feature":
> having the kernel print the machine name if the DTB does not also contain
> a "model" string (which they always do). To reduce the number of mach-*
> directories let's do without that feature and remove this directory.
>
> Signed-off-by: Andrew Davis <afd@...com>
> ---
>  MAINTAINERS                |  1 -
>  arch/arm/Kconfig           |  2 --
>  arch/arm/Kconfig.platforms | 25 +++++++++++++++++++++++++
>  arch/arm/Makefile          |  1 -
>  arch/arm/mach-hpe/Kconfig  | 23 -----------------------
>  arch/arm/mach-hpe/Makefile |  1 -
>  arch/arm/mach-hpe/gxp.c    | 16 ----------------

I'm dropping this patch from the series:

> -/* Copyright (C) 2022 Hewlett-Packard Enterprise Development Company, L.P. */
> -
> -#include <linux/of_platform.h>
> -#include <asm/mach/arch.h>
> -
> -static const char * const gxp_board_dt_compat[] = {
> -	"hpe,gxp",
> -	NULL,
> -};
> -
> -DT_MACHINE_START(GXP_DT, "HPE GXP")
> -	.dt_compat	= gxp_board_dt_compat,
> -	.l2c_aux_val = 0,
> -	.l2c_aux_mask = ~0,
> -MACHINE_END

As Russell had previously pointed out, removing the l2c settings
from a machine file breaks these machines if there is an actual
l2c node, which for gxp there is, same for most other Cortex-A9
and A5 based platforms.

The Uniphier machine that you also modify here is an exception
because they use a custom L2 cache implementation.

      Arnd