linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v1] arm64: dts: rockchip: Add cache information to the Rockchip RK3566 and RK3568 SoC

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: Tue, 27 Feb 2024 18:19:48 +0530
From: Anand Moon <linux.amoon@...il.com>
To: Dragan Simic <dsimic@...jaro.org>
Cc: Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>, 
	Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org>, Conor Dooley <conor+dt@...nel.org>, 
	Heiko Stuebner <heiko@...ech.de>, devicetree@...r.kernel.org, 
	linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-rockchip@...ts.infradead.org, 
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1] arm64: dts: rockchip: Add cache information to the
 Rockchip RK3566 and RK3568 SoC

Hi Dragan

On Tue, 27 Feb 2024 at 00:39, Dragan Simic <dsimic@...jaro.org> wrote:
>
> Hello Anand,
>
> On 2024-02-26 19:23, Anand Moon wrote:
> > As per RK3568 Datasheet and TRM add missing cache information to
> > the Rockchip RK3566 and RK3568 SoC.
> >
> > - Each Cortex-A55 core has 32KB of L1 instruction cache available and
> >       32KB of L1 data cache available with ECC.
> > - Along with 512KB Unified L3 cache with ECC.
> >
> > With adding instruction cache and data cache and a write buffer to
> > reduce the effect of main memory bandwidth and latency on data
> > access performance.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Anand Moon <linux.amoon@...il.com>
>
> I was about to send my own patch that adds the same missing cache
> information, so please allow me to describe the proposed way to move
> forward.
>
> The way I see it, your commit summary and description need a rather
> complete rewrite, to be more readable, more accurate, and to avoid
> including an irrelevant (and slightly misleading) description of the
> general role of caches.
>
> Also, the changes to the dtsi file would benefit from small touch-ups
> here and there, for improved consistency, etc.
>
> With all that in mind, I propose that you withdraw your patch and let
> me send my patch that will addresses all these issues, of course with
> a proper tag that lists you as a co-developer.  I think that would
> save us a fair amount of time going back and forth.
>
> I hope you agree.
>

I have no issue with this,.If you have a better version plz share this.

Thanks
-Anand