From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: * X-Spam-Status: No, score=1.7 required=3.0 tests=DKIMWL_WL_HIGH,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS,URIBL_DBL_ABUSE_MALW autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A4C13C2D0DB for ; Tue, 28 Jan 2020 16:57:23 +0000 (UTC) Received: from bombadil.infradead.org (bombadil.infradead.org [198.137.202.133]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6945624683 for ; Tue, 28 Jan 2020 16:57:23 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=lists.infradead.org header.i=@lists.infradead.org header.b="bD2HIRZP"; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (1024-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b="fT54GEgu" DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 6945624683 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=linuxfoundation.org Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=linux-arm-kernel-bounces+infradead-linux-arm-kernel=archiver.kernel.org@lists.infradead.org DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=lists.infradead.org; s=bombadil.20170209; h=Sender: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-Type:Cc:List-Subscribe:List-Help:List-Post: List-Archive:List-Unsubscribe:List-Id:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:References: Message-ID:Subject:To:From:Date:Reply-To:Content-ID:Content-Description: Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID: List-Owner; bh=5vvP+r4LlgPP7HsNwhZYgIx9L8zDbylC15LleHGO3rU=; b=bD2HIRZP32tyXs EvogjHgW0CO8g1QUaSn4wRrB+A8gngYdkpTx5v5oTFUh2ZvpJsmuCTEK/i/1O4WoiyGQkBzsPX2uf 6bM1h3dOOpuaC5u8BaZFXVBTTyl8x8E/G2feTdOIrBleudDeIBShz511XSmA2O2jN/l+Iak7UDeHC LCLJ49UTNlyBdtzlWkcqr57JKFuUCAnLBhQ+/TvzbhZnRtST2Ibfh88Ylk//cSZ+Ppy0wP0Ir5ur/ oDW7T8o6Uy94ejXAlHUjUKOmvtWACZBdBjie8j90KgH96COoaHw6pN7zDCyCNflKnEmp6QvDFCOaw KU9TD8QmUiGb+FuMyZAg==; Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=bombadil.infradead.org) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtp (Exim 4.92.3 #3 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1iwUAw-0005bK-Rs; Tue, 28 Jan 2020 16:57:18 +0000 Received: from mail.kernel.org ([198.145.29.99]) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtps (Exim 4.92.3 #3 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1iwUAu-0005aa-5L for linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org; Tue, 28 Jan 2020 16:57:17 +0000 Received: from localhost (83-86-89-107.cable.dynamic.v4.ziggo.nl [83.86.89.107]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 6CD16214AF; Tue, 28 Jan 2020 16:57:14 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=default; t=1580230634; bh=0zx2j6Lsa9HwzHF4AoAgg97MA5gTZ+rv9fANMAw8vc0=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=fT54GEgub6xQ+dP1/kFc16jal8sv+sq/QzA3NbhbYxQo4EEtJbB311GkL0yZ1k6qL 2Qz0YeWv1OD6dQr7NdpT404ix2ZEcx7+mxIghu5p6kgJTQgVvZiFPC2LXrSB+2xBJ9 zMdfhIjclnj092JF68J3w0MHKFeYvqedJPNU9CMs= Date: Tue, 28 Jan 2020 17:57:12 +0100 From: Greg KH To: Benjamin GAIGNARD Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/7] bus: Introduce firewall controller framework Message-ID: <20200128165712.GA3667596@kroah.com> References: <20200128153806.7780-1-benjamin.gaignard@st.com> <20200128153806.7780-3-benjamin.gaignard@st.com> <20200128155243.GC3438643@kroah.com> <0dd9dc95-1329-0ad4-d03d-99899ea4f574@st.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <0dd9dc95-1329-0ad4-d03d-99899ea4f574@st.com> X-CRM114-Version: 20100106-BlameMichelson ( TRE 0.8.0 (BSD) ) MR-646709E3 X-CRM114-CacheID: sfid-20200128_085716_242641_F26D18A3 X-CRM114-Status: GOOD ( 22.39 ) X-BeenThere: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: "robh@kernel.org" , Loic PALLARDY , "arnd@arndb.de" , "devicetree@vger.kernel.org" , "system-dt@lists.openampproject.org" , "s.hauer@pengutronix.de" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , "broonie@kernel.org" , "lkml@metux.net" , "linux-imx@nxp.com" , "kernel@pengutronix.de" , "sudeep.holla@arm.com" , "fabio.estevam@nxp.com" , "stefano.stabellini@xilinx.com" , "shawnguo@kernel.org" , "linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org" Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: "linux-arm-kernel" Errors-To: linux-arm-kernel-bounces+infradead-linux-arm-kernel=archiver.kernel.org@lists.infradead.org On Tue, Jan 28, 2020 at 04:41:29PM +0000, Benjamin GAIGNARD wrote: > > On 1/28/20 4:52 PM, Greg KH wrote: > > On Tue, Jan 28, 2020 at 04:38:01PM +0100, Benjamin Gaignard wrote: > >> The goal of this framework is to offer an interface for the > >> hardware blocks controlling bus accesses rights. > >> > >> Bus firewall controllers are typically used to control if a > >> hardware block can perform read or write operations on bus. > > So put this in the bus-specific code that controls the bus that these > > devices live on. Why put it in the driver core when this is only on one > > "bus" (i.e. the catch-all-and-a-bag-of-chips platform bus)? > > It is really similar to what pin controller does, configuring an > hardware block given DT information. Great, then use that instead :) > I could argue that firewalls are not bus themselves they only interact > with it. They live on a bus, and do so in bus-specific ways, right? > Bus firewalls exist on other SoC, I hope some others could be added in > this framework. ETZPC is only the first. Then put it on the bus it lives on, and the bus that the drivers for that device are being controlled with. That sounds like the sane place to do so, right? > > And really, this should just be a totally new bus type, right? And any > > devices on this bus should be changed to be on this new bus, and the > > drivers changed to support them, instead of trying to overload the > > platform bus with more stuff. > > I have tried to use the bus notifier to avoid to add this code at probe > time but without success: > > https://lkml.org/lkml/2018/2/27/300 Almost 2 years ago? I can't remember something written 1 week ago... Yes, don't abuse the notifier chain. I hate that thing as it is. > I have also tried to disable the nodes at runtime and Mark Rutland > explain me why it was wrong. The bus controller should do this, right? Why not just do it there? thanks, greg k-h _______________________________________________ linux-arm-kernel mailing list linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel