linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH 0/2] mtd: nand: add manafacturer specific handling

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:	Mon, 2 May 2016 22:04:35 +0200
From:	Richard Weinberger <richard.weinberger@...il.com>
To:	Boris BREZILLON <b.brezillon.dev@...il.com>
Cc:	David Woodhouse <dwmw2@...radead.org>,
	Brian Norris <computersforpeace@...il.com>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"linux-mtd@...ts.infradead.org" <linux-mtd@...ts.infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 0/2] mtd: nand: add manafacturer specific handling

On Mon, Feb 24, 2014 at 6:29 PM, Boris BREZILLON
<b.brezillon.dev@...il.com> wrote:
> Hello,
>
> This is a proposal to add support for manufacturer specific handling of
> NAND chips.
>
> Currently the only ones allowed to modify how NAND chips are accessed are
> NAND controllers (by modifying the nand_chip callbacks) and NAND core code
> (by setting default callbacks when these are not specified by the NAND
> controller).
>
> This series adds support for manufacturer/vendor specific handling, which is
> particularly useful for read retry implementation that are (at least for
> the moment) manufacturer specific.
>
> I know there was a debate on how we should support all these READ RETRY
> implementations (see http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.linux.drivers.mtd/50603),
> so please tell if I'm wrong.

Just realized that this got no feedback at all.
Brian?

-- 
Thanks,
//richard