From: Vineet Gupta <vineet.gupta1@synopsys.com>
To: Eugeniy Paltsev <eugeniy.paltsev@synopsys.com>,
"Eugeniy.Paltsev@synopsys.com" <eugeniy.paltsev@synopsys.com>,
"linux-snps-arc@lists.infradead.org"
<linux-snps-arc@lists.infradead.org>
Cc: "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
"Alexey Brodkin" <alexey.brodkin@synopsys.com>,
"khilman@baylibre.com" <khilman@baylibre.com>,
"clabbe@baylibre.com" <clabbe@baylibre.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] ARC: U-boot: check arguments paranoidly
Date: Tue, 12 Feb 2019 17:34:13 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <C2D7FE5348E1B147BCA15975FBA23075014643369A@US01WEMBX2.internal.synopsys.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: 1549992326.27724.98.camel@synopsys.com
On 2/12/19 9:25 AM, Eugeniy Paltsev wrote:
>> This is technically changing the ABI - I think we don't need to enforce this -
>> keep ignoring this
> I think it's better to add this check:
> * This check doesn't break backward compatibility. ARC U-boot pass zero to r1
> from the beginnings, I specially checked this. So we doesn't change ABI,
> we only document it ;)
OK good.
> * By adding this check we can cheap and easily minimize problems in JTAG case.
Prior to your patch this register was irrelevant - it didn't matter for jtag or
uboot cause what its value was since it was not being checked at all. Now you
enforce this be 0. Simple reasoning tells me it will likely cause problems, if
any, but won't reduce them at all. So I'd insist we keep ignoring it even if uboot
was zeroing it out. Atleast this leaves the door open any future changes.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-02-12 17:34 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-02-12 15:39 [PATCH 0/2] RC: rework U-boot arguments handling Eugeniy Paltsev
2019-02-12 15:39 ` [PATCH 1/2] ARC: U-boot: check arguments paranoidly Eugeniy Paltsev
2019-02-12 16:39 ` LABBE Corentin
2019-02-12 16:41 ` Vineet Gupta
2019-02-12 16:45 ` Vineet Gupta
2019-02-12 17:25 ` Eugeniy Paltsev
2019-02-12 17:34 ` Vineet Gupta [this message]
2019-02-12 15:39 ` [PATCH 2/2] ARC: enable uboot support unconditionally Eugeniy Paltsev
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=C2D7FE5348E1B147BCA15975FBA23075014643369A@US01WEMBX2.internal.synopsys.com \
--to=vineet.gupta1@synopsys.com \
--cc=alexey.brodkin@synopsys.com \
--cc=clabbe@baylibre.com \
--cc=eugeniy.paltsev@synopsys.com \
--cc=khilman@baylibre.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-snps-arc@lists.infradead.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).