| 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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <20110311135335.GG7357@pulham.picochip.com> Date: Fri, 11 Mar 2011 13:53:35 +0000 From: Jamie Iles <jamie@...ieiles.com> To: Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD <plagnioj@...osoft.com> Cc: Jamie Iles <jamie@...ieiles.com>, Nicolas Ferre <nicolas.ferre@...el.com>, netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/8] macb: unify at91 and avr32 platform data On Fri, Mar 11, 2011 at 02:37:13PM +0100, Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD wrote: > On 13:25 Fri 11 Mar , Jamie Iles wrote: > > On Fri, Mar 11, 2011 at 01:52:46PM +0100, Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD wrote: > > > On 08:56 Fri 11 Mar , Jamie Iles wrote: > > > > On Fri, Mar 11, 2011 at 02:41:40AM +0100, Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD wrote: > > > > > keep as we need to remove the #ifdef AT91 to cpu_is > > > > > > > > > > I've patch for this > > > > > > > > Is this for the user IO register where the value written is conditional > > > > on both RMII/MII and arch type? > > > yes for > > > > > > #if defined(CONFIG_ARCH_AT91) > > > macb_writel(bp, USRIO, (MACB_BIT(RMII) | MACB_BIT(CLKEN))); > > > #else > > > macb_writel(bp, USRIO, 0); > > > #endif > > > else > > > #if defined(CONFIG_ARCH_AT91) > > > macb_writel(bp, USRIO, MACB_BIT(CLKEN)); > > > #else > > > macb_writel(bp, USRIO, MACB_BIT(MII)); > > > #endif > > > > Ok, but what about non-AT91/AVR32 systems? They may not have a > > mach/cpu.h and won't have cpu_is_foo() for the platforms the driver is > > interested in. > > > > Could we supply these values in the platform data so the driver doesn't > > need to do any cpu_is_ magic? > > for other arch you can but at91 I prefer to avoid this copy and paste in every > soc Ok, just so I'm clear, you want to be able to set the USRIO register based on a cpu_is_foo() test which requires mach/cpu.h to be included. For other architectures we may not have mach/cpu.h and the cpu_is_foo() macros, so we'd still need to protect all of that with "#ifdef CONFIG_ARCH_AT91" tests. Is that okay? Jamie -- 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
Powered by blists - more mailing lists