linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0/6] i2c-davinci gpio pulsed SCL recovery with ICPFUNC

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:	Tue, 19 Apr 2011 08:20:09 -0400
From:	Ben Gardiner <bengardiner@...ometrics.ca>
To:	Jon Povey <Jon.Povey@...elogic.co.uk>
Cc:	"Nori, Sekhar" <nsekhar@...com>,
	"davinci-linux-open-source@...ux.davincidsp.com" 
	<davinci-linux-open-source@...ux.davincidsp.com>,
	"linux-i2c@...r.kernel.org" <linux-i2c@...r.kernel.org>,
	Ben Dooks <ben-linux@...ff.org>,
	"linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org" 
	<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Bastian Ruppert <Bastian.Ruppert@...erin.de>,
	"Griffis, Brad" <bgriffis@...com>,
	Philby John <pjohn@...mvista.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/6] i2c-davinci gpio pulsed SCL recovery with ICPFUNC

Hi Jon,

On Mon, Apr 18, 2011 at 9:47 PM, Jon Povey <Jon.Povey@...elogic.co.uk> wrote:
> Ben Gardiner wrote:
>
>>>> When creating this series I noticed that there are obvious
>>>> similarities between the existing recovery routine implemented by
>>>> Philby John and John Povey
>
>> I'm not sure how the 20us in the existing method was derived -- I
>> wonder if Philby John or John Povey could comment?
>
> I've been a little bemused about why I am getting credited for I2C
> bus recovery work. I don't remember doing any work on that.

My mistake -- sorry. Also sorry for getting your name wrong repeatedly.

> I did a couple of patches to fix a race when setting up a TX, but
> those are, afaik, unrelated.

In "i2c-davinci: Fix race when setting up for TX" and "i2c-davinci:
Fix TX setup for more SoCs" you mention testing on DM355 -- is there
any you have hardware on which the recovery procedure is executed on
occasion and that you would be available to test modifications to the
current implementation?

> All I know about the bus recovery stuff is looking at it a while back
> and thinking hmm, that seems to wiggle gpio without changing the
> pinmuxing, so it can't possibly work.

:) Probably not then.

Best Regards,
Ben Gardiner

---
Nanometrics Inc.
http://www.nanometrics.ca
--
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/