Hi, On Mon, May 6, 2019 at 4:58 PM Doug Anderson <dianders@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Hi, > > On Mon, May 6, 2019 at 2:10 PM Kees Cook <keescook@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > From: Douglas Anderson <dianders@xxxxxxxxxxxx> > > Date: Fri, May 3, 2019 at 10:48 AM > > To: Kees Cook, Anton Vorontsov > > Cc: <linux-rockchip@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, <jwerner@xxxxxxxxxxxx>, > > <groeck@xxxxxxxxxxxx>, <mka@xxxxxxxxxxxx>, <briannorris@xxxxxxxxxxxx>, > > Douglas Anderson, Colin Cross, Tony Luck, > > <linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > > > > When you try to run an upstream kernel on an old ARM-based Chromebook > > > you'll find that console-ramoops doesn't work. > > > > > > Old ARM-based Chromebooks, before <https://crrev.com/c/439792> > > > ("ramoops: support upstream {console,pmsg,ftrace}-size properties") > > > used to create a "ramoops" node at the top level that looked like: > > > > > > / { > > > ramoops { > > > compatible = "ramoops"; > > > reg = <...>; > > > record-size = <...>; > > > dump-oops; > > > }; > > > }; > > > > > > ...and these Chromebooks assumed that the downstream kernel would make > > > console_size / pmsg_size match the record size. The above ramoops > > > node was added by the firmware so it's not easy to make any changes. > > > > > > Let's match the expected behavior, but only for those using the old > > > backward-compatible way of working where ramoops is right under the > > > root node. > > > > > > NOTE: if there are some out-of-tree devices that had ramoops at the > > > top level, left everything but the record size as 0, and somehow > > > doesn't want this behavior, we can try to add more conditions here. > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Douglas Anderson <dianders@xxxxxxxxxxxx> > > > > I like this; thanks! Rob is this okay by you? I just want to > > double-check since it's part of the DT parsing logic. > > > > I'll pick it up and add a Cc: stable. > > Hold off a second--I may need to send out a v2 but out of time for the > day. I think I need a #include file to fix errors on x86: > > > implicit declaration of function 'of_node_is_root' [-Werror,-Wimplicit-function-declaration > > I'm unfortunately out of time for now, but I'll post a v2 within the next day. OK, it needs this to land first: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20190507044801.250396-1-dianders@xxxxxxxxxxxx/T/#u I thought it'd be OK to just send a separate patch. -Doug _______________________________________________ Linux-rockchip mailing list Linux-rockchip@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-rockchip