linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 1/6] spi: core: handle timeout error from transfer

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

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

Date:   Tue, 3 Apr 2018 19:24:11 +0300
From:   Sergey Suloev <ssuloev@...altech.com>
To:     Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
Cc:     Maxime Ripard <maxime.ripard@...tlin.com>,
        Chen-Yu Tsai <wens@...e.org>, linux-spi@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/6] spi: core: handle timeout error from
 transfer_one()

On 04/03/2018 07:18 PM, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 03, 2018 at 07:00:55PM +0300, Sergey Suloev wrote:
>> On 04/03/2018 06:52 PM, Mark Brown wrote:
>>> On Tue, Apr 03, 2018 at 06:29:00PM +0300, Sergey Suloev wrote:
>>>> As long as sun4i/sun6i SPI drivers have overriden the default
>>>> "wait for completion" procedure then we need to properly
>>>> handle -ETIMEDOUT error from transfer_one().
>>> Why is this connected to those drivers specifically?
>> These 2 drivers have their own "waiting" code and not using the code from
>> SPI core.
> Does this not apply to any other driver - why is this something we only
> have to do when these drivers do it?  That's what's setting off alarm
> bells.

sun4i/sun6i drivers have let's say "smart" waiting while SPI core uses a 
fixed interval to wait.

I can't say for every SPI driver in kernel, that's outside of my area of 
expertise.