linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 3/7] dt-bindings: reset: Add binding constants for BLZP1600

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: <c0c3257b-7706-4055-942e-8f66678cd30d@linaro.org>
Date: Wed, 24 Apr 2024 17:20:18 +0200
From: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@...aro.org>
To: Niko Pasaloukos <nikolaos.pasaloukos@...ize.com>,
 "linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org"
 <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
 "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Cc: James Cowgill <james.cowgill@...ize.com>,
 Matt Redfearn <matthew.redfearn@...ize.com>,
 Neil Jones <neil.jones@...ize.com>, Philipp Zabel <p.zabel@...gutronix.de>,
 Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>,
 Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org>,
 Conor Dooley <conor+dt@...nel.org>,
 "devicetree@...r.kernel.org" <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 3/7] dt-bindings: reset: Add binding constants for
 BLZP1600

On 24/04/2024 16:16, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>> +
>> +/* BLZP1600 reset numbers as defined in the hardware architecture */
>> +
>> +#define BLZP1600_A53_C0_HARD_RST 0
>> +#define BLZP1600_A53_C0_SOFT_RST 1
>> +#define BLZP1600_A53_C1_HARD_RST 2
>> +#define BLZP1600_A53_C1_SOFT_RST 3
>> +#define BLZP1600_A53_L2_CACHE_RST 4
>> +#define BLZP1600_A53_DBG_RST 5
>> +#define BLZP1600_GIC_RST 6
>> +#define BLZP1600_CRYPTO_RST 7
>> +/* reset 8 invalid */
> 
> Same concerns.
> 
> However another problem is lack of users of it. Your patchset looks
> random - this goes to subsustem, but there is no device binding, no
> driver, no DTS. Could be result of lack of threading. :/

And now I see my reply at v1 saying that these gaps are unexpected.
Please respond to reviewers comments either acknowledging the comment or
responding with feedback. What are these header constants representing?

Best regards,
Krzysztof