linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] mmc: Fix read-only detection with JMicron 388 chip

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

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Thu, 21 Apr 2011 20:24:42 +0200
From:	Takashi Iwai <tiwai@...e.de>
To:	Chris Ball <cjb@...top.org>
Cc:	Aries Lee <arieslee@...cron.com>, linux-mmc@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mmc: Fix read-only detection with JMicron 388 chip

At Thu, 21 Apr 2011 13:36:03 -0400,
Chris Ball wrote:
> 
> Hi Takashi,
> 
> On Thu, Apr 21 2011, Takashi Iwai wrote:
> >> I don't like overwriting ops here -- it's too magical, and now we have
> >> to maintain the ops table in two places.  A quirk seems justified here,
> >> even though we're trying to reduce them in general.
> >
> > Well, I also used quirk bit in my very first version I worked for
> > 2.6.32 kernel.  But when I looked at 2.6.39, quirks are almost full --
> > only the last one bit is left for bit 31.  So I didn't want to finish
> > it :)
> >
> >>  Can anyone find a better solution?
> >  
> > One way would be to copy the ops table itself in struct sdhci_host
> > instead of keeping the ops table pointer.  Then you can overwrite only
> > the specific op in each probe_slot callback.
> 
> I think I'd rather not touch ops at all and keep the code simple --
> if you don't mind, please post a version with quirks, and I'll work
> on freeing up a few bits.

OK, I'll send shortly.


Takashi
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/