On Thu, Mar 19, 2015 at 05:52:54PM +0000, Suzuki K. Poulose wrote: > On 19/03/15 17:38, Sudeep Holla wrote: > > > > > > On 19/03/15 17:32, Mark Rutland wrote: > >> One more thing: > >> > >>> @@ -883,7 +894,11 @@ static inline const struct cci_pmu_model *get_cci_model(struct platform_device * > >>> pdev->dev.of_node); > >>> if (!match) > >>> return NULL; > >>> + if (match->data) > >>> + return match->data; > >>> > >>> + dev_warn(&pdev->dev, "DEPRECATED compatible property," > >>> + "requires secure access to CCI registers"); > >>> return probe_cci_model(pdev); > >>> } > >> > >> Before the probe, could we please have: > >> > >> if (!IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_ARM)) > >> return -EINVAL; > >> > >> On arm64 we require a model-specific string, and we shouldn't go > >> touching secure-only registers. > >> > > > > IIUC platform_has_secure_cci_access always return false for ARM64 > > preventing any secure access. No ? > > > Yes, you are right. The check has been abstracted away with the > platform_has_secure_cci_access(). Ah, that's fine then. Sorry for the noise! Mark. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe devicetree" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
