linux-kernel - Re: [REPOST PATCH v3 1/4] mmc: dw_mmc: Add "disable-wp" device tree property

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, 10 Jan 2013 15:57:31 -0800
From:	Doug Anderson <dianders@...omium.org>
To:	Doug Anderson <dianders@...omium.org>
Cc:	Olof Johansson <olof@...om.net>, linux-mmc@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-samsung-soc@...r.kernel.org,
	Thomas Abraham <thomas.abraham@...aro.org>,
	Kukjin Kim <kgene.kim@...sung.com>,
	Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
	Will Newton <will.newton@...tec.com>,
	Chris Ball <cjb@...top.org>,
	Jaehoon Chung <jh80.chung@...sung.com>,
	Seungwon Jeon <tgih.jun@...sung.com>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Grant Likely <grant.likely@...retlab.ca>,
	Rob Herring <rob.herring@...xeda.com>,
	Rob Landley <rob@...dley.net>,
	Abhilash Kesavan <a.kesavan@...sung.com>,
	Kyungmin Park <kyungmin.park@...sung.com>,
	devicetree-discuss@...ts.ozlabs.org, linux-doc@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [REPOST PATCH v3 1/4] mmc: dw_mmc: Add "disable-wp" device tree property

Hi,

A followup as I did more investigation here...

On Thu, Jan 10, 2013 at 3:23 PM, Doug Anderson <dianders@...omium.org> wrote:
> Olof,
>
> Thanks for your comments.
>
> On Thu, Jan 10, 2013 at 3:01 PM, Olof Johansson <olof@...om.net> wrote:
>>
>> The previous code used the controller-common quirk field to set a
>> per-controller DW_MCI_QUIRK_NO_WRITE_PROTECT. Is there really need to
>> do this per-slot? And if so, please explain in the commit message why
>> there is need for a brand new quirk for the same functionality.
>
> I'm happy to move back to using a per-controller quirk here--it
> simplifies the code quite a bit since it can use all of the
> preexisting quirks code.  I originally coded it up as per-slot since
> generally each slot needs its own write-protect line.  Without ever
> seeing any hardware using multiple slots per controller I can't say
> how common this would be, so it may be overkill to handle that
> situation.

Actually, it looks like the per-controller
DW_MCI_QUIRK_NO_WRITE_PROTECT was added at the same time as the code
using it was added to 'drivers/mmc/host/dw_mmc-exynos.c'.  Since this
patch series removes the code from dw_mmc-exynos.c I can also remove
the controller-level quirk.

...I'll plan to spin a new rev tomorrow that leaves the 'no write
protect' quirk at the slot level but removes the old controller-level
quirk.  :)

-Doug
--
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/