| 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
| ||
|
Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2010 10:16:19 +0300 From: Felipe Balbi <felipe.balbi@...ia.com> To: "Balbi Felipe (Nokia-MS/Helsinki)" <felipe.balbi@...ia.com> Cc: "ext Gopinath, Thara" <thara@...com>, Samuel Ortiz <sameo@...ux.intel.com>, "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, "linux-omap@...r.kernel.org" <linux-omap@...r.kernel.org>, Tony Lindgren <tony@...mide.com>, Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org> Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/4] mfd: twl-core: switch over to defines in twl.h Hi, On Wed, Aug 18, 2010 at 09:10:22AM +0200, Balbi Felipe (Nokia-MS/Helsinki) wrote: >On Wed, Aug 18, 2010 at 09:03:44AM +0200, ext Gopinath, Thara wrote: >>>>No I am not talking about the key values. I was talking about the register offset >>>>for TWL4030_PM_MASTER_PROTECT_KEY. My question is, is it ok for it to be 0xd or 0xe. >>>>Earlier we were using 0xd and in the new implementation it has been changed to 0xe. >> >>Typo. Earlier we were using 0xe and in the new implementation it has >>been changed to 0xd. > >you're right, I'm not sure how I came up with that value since the TRM >shows 0x0e, maybe a copy&paste error. Will change patch 1. ok, it's because there's no register 0x0a. And I missed that when defined the register space. Good catch, thanks. I wonder why it didn't fail to write to that register address :-? -- balbi DefectiveByDesign.org -- 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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists