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: <20240530202720.GA1656150@ravnborg.org>
Date: Thu, 30 May 2024 22:27:20 +0200
From: Sam Ravnborg <sam@...nborg.org>
To: "Rob Herring (Arm)" <robh@...nel.org>
Cc: Saravana Kannan <saravanak@...gle.com>,
	Andreas Larsson <andreas@...sler.com>, sparclinux@...r.kernel.org,
	devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] of: WARN on using default root node
 #address-cells/#size-cells

Hi Rob.

On Thu, May 30, 2024 at 01:50:48PM -0500, Rob Herring (Arm) wrote:
> While OpenFirmware originally allowed default values of #address-cells
> and #size-cells, FDT has long required explicit values. It's been a
> warning in dtc for the root node since the beginning (2005) and for
> any parent node since 2007. Of course, not all FDT uses dtc, but that
> should be the majority by far. The various extracted OF devicetrees I
> have dating back to the 1990s (various PowerMac, OLPC, PASemi Nemo)
> all have explicit root node properties.
> 
> I have no idea what exists for Sparc, so disabling the warning for it.
> If any other platforms hit the warning, then the warning can be
> disabled for them.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Rob Herring (Arm) <robh@...nel.org>
> ---
> Sparc folks, If anyone can dump DTs from some Sparc systems it would be
> helpful.

For sparc the format looks much different - see:
git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/davem/prtconfs.git

This is dumps from the prtconf tool found in Solaris.

Looking at for example t1000 it looks like #size-cells, #address-cells
are used properly.

Looking at the older ss20 I see no use of these.
Looking at sb100 (old sparc64 machine) I see inconsistent use.

My best guess is that sparc32 machines see little to no use of them.
sparc64 use them, but on older machines the usage is inconsistent.

	Sam

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ