linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v1 3/3] soc: aspeed: lpc-pcc: Add PCC controller support

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: <CAOO6b=s4CyVvCP8Gb_OGWCMX3ggs9sm6_WnqEB1h6ScVVJppDQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 25 Feb 2025 16:48:09 -0800
From: Mo Elbadry <elbadrym@...gle.com>
To: Andrew Jeffery <andrew@...econstruct.com.au>
Cc: Kevin Chen <kevin_chen@...eedtech.com>, "joel@....id.au" <joel@....id.au>, 
	Z-ChiaWei Wang <chiawei_wang@...eedtech.com>, 
	"linux-aspeed@...ts.ozlabs.org" <linux-aspeed@...ts.ozlabs.org>, 
	"linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org" <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>, 
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, "tomer.maimon" <tomer.maimon@...oton.com>, 
	Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@...nel.org>, "lee@...nel.org" <lee@...nel.org>, "robh@...nel.org" <robh@...nel.org>, 
	"krzk+dt@...nel.org" <krzk+dt@...nel.org>, "conor+dt@...nel.org" <conor+dt@...nel.org>, 
	Jenmin Yuan <jenmin_yuan@...eedtech.com>, BMC-SW <BMC-SW@...eedtech.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 3/3] soc: aspeed: lpc-pcc: Add PCC controller support

Hi Andrew,

Understood, your comments do make sense and are the right way to go.

I agree on not rushing, we want to see things moving forward but
properly as well.

Thank you for your help,
Mo



On Tue, Feb 25, 2025 at 3:28 PM Andrew Jeffery
<andrew@...econstruct.com.au> wrote:
>
> Hi Mo,
>
> On Mon, 2025-02-24 at 20:34 -0800, Mo Elbadry wrote:
> > Hi Andrew,
> >
> > I agree that a small layer of abstraction is needed to provide common
> > chardev semantics to userspace. I think that effort can come where both
> > Nuvoton and Aspeed unify their design and agree on a common abstraction
> > layer.
> >
> > I think such efforts may take some time for both to unify, is it possible
> > to get this upstreamed (after addressing all other comments) while both
> > parties work on an agreed unified abstraction layer?
> >
>
> Given Arnd doesn't want bespoke userspace interfaces in the SoC drivers
> this will need to go elsewhere, perhaps drivers/char or drivers/misc.
> Greg and Arnd maintain both, so the patch needs to make a convincing
> argument to them. For my part, my comments are just opinions based on
> my understanding of the use-cases and the SoCs involved, and the desire
> for reasonable devicetree and userspace interfaces.
>
> I don't think it's right to try to rush things as devicetree and
> userspace interfaces can be tricky to change or remove. Rushing tends
> to be painful for all involved in the long run.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Andrew