linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] ACPI: GTDT: Correctly number platform devices for MMIO timers

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: <aShpQ4iDceJ7-Nzs@willie-the-truck>
Date: Thu, 27 Nov 2025 15:07:47 +0000
From: Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>
To: Hanjun Guo <guohanjun@...wei.com>
Cc: Marc Zyngier <maz@...nel.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org,
	Pavan Kondeti <pavan.kondeti@....qualcomm.com>,
	Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@....com>,
	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>,
	Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@...aro.org>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
	Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ACPI: GTDT: Correctly number platform devices for MMIO
 timers

Hey Hanjun,

On Fri, Nov 21, 2025 at 09:14:04PM +0800, Hanjun Guo wrote:
> On 2025/11/21 16:55, Marc Zyngier wrote:
> > On Fri, 21 Nov 2025 02:53:17 +0000,
> > Hanjun Guo <guohanjun@...wei.com> wrote:
> > > 
> > > On 2025/10/30 19:01, Marc Zyngier wrote:
> > > > Use the actual timer counter instead of the watchdog counter.
> > > > 
> > > > Fixes: 5669d92f3efa4 ("ACPI: GTDT: Generate platform devices for MMIO timers")
> > > > Reported-by: Pavan Kondeti <pavan.kondeti@....qualcomm.com>
> > > > Signed-off-by: Marc Zyngier <maz@...nel.org>
> > > > Cc: Hanjun Guo <guohanjun@...wei.com>
> > > > Cc: Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@....com>
> > > > Cc: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>
> > > > Cc: Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@...aro.org>
> > > > Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
> > > > Cc: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>
> > > > ---
> > > >    drivers/acpi/arm64/gtdt.c | 4 ++--
> > > >    1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> > > > 
> > > > diff --git a/drivers/acpi/arm64/gtdt.c b/drivers/acpi/arm64/gtdt.c
> > > > index fd995a1d3d248..8cc8af8fd408c 100644
> > > > --- a/drivers/acpi/arm64/gtdt.c
> > > > +++ b/drivers/acpi/arm64/gtdt.c
> > > > @@ -430,10 +430,10 @@ static int __init gtdt_platform_timer_init(void)
> > > >    				continue;
> > > >      			pdev = platform_device_register_data(NULL,
> > > > "gtdt-arm-mmio-timer",
> > > > -							     gwdt_count, &atm,
> > > > +							     mmio_timer_count, &atm,
> > > >    							     sizeof(atm));
> > > >    			if (IS_ERR(pdev)) {
> > > > -				pr_err("Can't register timer %d\n", gwdt_count);
> > > > +				pr_err("Can't register timer %d\n", mmio_timer_count);
> > > >    				continue;
> > > >    			}
> > > 
> > > "typo" I think :)
> > > 
> > > Acked-by: Hanjun Guo <guohanjun@...wei.com>
> > > 
> > > Will this go via ARM64 tree?
> > 
> > Is that where the ACPI updates are routed to? This fixes a patch that
> > was routed tip, so I'd have expected this to go via the same route.
> > 
> > In any case, I've added Catalin and Will on Cc.
> 
> Yes, ARM64 ACPI code merged via ARM64 tree.

Catalin and I were chatting the other day and we wondered whether it's
worth adding something to MAINTAINERS so that we get CC'd on arm64 ACPI
patches without you having to add us in manually? We wouldn't merge
anything without an Ack from somebody listed under the "ACPI FOR ARM64"
entry but it would mean that we get picked up by get_maintainer.pl.

What do you think?

I can't tell whether this would be best as an F: line under the arm64
architecture entry, or adding us as R:/M: for the ACPI/arm64 entry.

Will