netdev - Re: [PATCH 2/2] [POWERPC] UCC nodes cleanup

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: <20080411172106.GA17786@polina.dev.rtsoft.ru>
Date:	Fri, 11 Apr 2008 21:21:06 +0400
From:	Anton Vorontsov <avorontsov@...mvista.com>
To:	Timur Tabi <timur@...escale.com>
Cc:	Kumar Gala <galak@...nel.crashing.org>, linuxppc-dev@...abs.org,
	Jeff Garzik <jgarzik@...ox.com>, linux-serial@...r.kernel.org,
	netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] [POWERPC] UCC nodes cleanup

On Fri, Apr 11, 2008 at 12:12:30PM -0500, Timur Tabi wrote:
> Anton Vorontsov wrote:
> 
> > Or maybe I'm thinking here in terms of "fsl,ucc"... and cell-index is
> > indeed should be -1... don't know. Please decide. ;-)
> 
> Well, that's what I was thinking.  cell-index is zero-based, so UCC1 should have
> cell-index = <0>.
> 
> Of course, this means all the code needs to change, since I think device-id is
> one-based.

Yup. You raised a really good question, because we're _introducing_
cell-index for UCC nodes, and if we'll choice wrong numbering scheme
now, then there will be no way back w/o breaking backward compatibility.

-- 
Anton Vorontsov
email: cbouatmailru@...il.com
irc://irc.freenode.net/bd2
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html