linux-kernel - Re: [STLinux Kernel] [PATCH 0/7] reset: Consumers to explicitly request 'exclusive' or 'shared' lines

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

Date:	Thu, 16 Jun 2016 11:03:27 +0200
From:	Philipp Zabel <p.zabel@...gutronix.de>
To:	Lee Jones <lee.jones@...aro.org>
Cc:	Peter Griffin <peter.griffin@...aro.org>,
	linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	balbi@...nel.org, kernel@...inux.com,
	srinivas.kandagatla@...il.com, linux-usb@...r.kernel.org,
	kishon@...com, gregkh@...uxfoundation.org
Subject: Re: [STLinux Kernel] [PATCH 0/7] reset: Consumers to explicitly
 request 'exclusive' or 'shared' lines

Hi Lee,

Am Dienstag, den 07.06.2016, 10:24 +0100 schrieb Lee Jones:
[...]
> I guess it should really go into the -rcs, yes.  Since Hans' patch
> actually breaks a lot of devices.  I'm pretty surprised a patch
> capable of this much damage was actually accepted to be honest.

I wasn't aware there were more drivers already sharing resets, and
arguably before Hans' patches this wasn't really supported at all.
It only worked by circumstance.

> A better approach would have been to issue a warning, but keep the
> semantics the same for at least a couple of releases.  However, I
> guess the damage has been done now, so let's do what we can do fix
> it.

Agreed.

regards
Philipp