linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v1 0/6] SiFive cache controller PMU drivers

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]

Message-ID: <20240409-corral-untruth-591b29f6565d@spud>
Date: Tue, 9 Apr 2024 16:01:15 +0100
From: Conor Dooley <conor@...nel.org>
To: Conor Dooley <conor.dooley@...rochip.com>
Cc: Samuel Holland <samuel.holland@...ive.com>,
	Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>, Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
	Eric Lin <eric.lin@...ive.com>, Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@...belt.com>,
	devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Paul Walmsley <paul.walmsley@...ive.com>,
	linux-riscv@...ts.infradead.org, Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
	Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org>,
	linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 0/6] SiFive cache controller PMU drivers

On Fri, Feb 16, 2024 at 10:05:04AM +0000, Conor Dooley wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 15, 2024 at 04:08:12PM -0800, Samuel Holland wrote:
> 
> > All three of these cache controllers (with PMUs) have been integrated in
> > SoCs by our customers. However, as none of those SoCs have been publicly
> > announced yet, I cannot include SoC-specific compatible strings in this
> > version of the devicetree bindings.
> 
> And I don't want to apply any of those dt-binding patches until then.
> Stuff like "sifive,perfmon-counters" seems like a property that would
> go away with a device-specific compatible, at least for the ccache.

Reading the P550 stuff today reminded me that I had not got around to
looking at this series again. You should be able to use that to satisfy
my wish for some soc-specific compatibles, right?

And w.r.r. the perfmon-counters property, looked to me like Rob was
proposing it not even having to be vendor specific.

Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (229 bytes)