linux-kernel - RE: [PATCH 2/4] mfd: twl-core: switch over to defines in twl.h

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]

Message-ID: <5A47E75E594F054BAF48C5E4FC4B92AB032422251A@dbde02.ent.ti.com>
Date:	Wed, 18 Aug 2010 19:50:33 +0530
From:	"Gopinath, Thara" <thara@...com>
To:	"felipe.balbi@...ia.com" <felipe.balbi@...ia.com>
CC:	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



>>-----Original Message-----
>>From: Felipe Balbi [mailto:felipe.balbi@...ia.com]
>>Sent: Wednesday, August 18, 2010 12:46 PM
>>To: Balbi Felipe (Nokia-MS/Helsinki)
>>Cc: Gopinath, Thara; Samuel Ortiz; linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org; linux-omap@...r.kernel.org; Tony
>>Lindgren; Andrew Morton
>>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 :-?

0xd is a valid register offset. Hence no crash. Anyways I saw your new
patch. Looks ok to me.

Regards
Thara
--
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/