linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] PWM: atmel: fix incorrect CDTY value after enabling or disabling

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Mon, 25 Aug 2014 14:35:50 +0200
From:	Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@...il.com>
To:	Alexandre Belloni <alexandre.belloni@...e-electrons.com>
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Nicolas Ferre <nicolas.ferre@...el.com>,
	Bo Shen <voice.shen@...el.com>, linux-pwm@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] PWM: atmel: fix incorrect CDTY value after enabling or
 disabling

On Mon, Aug 25, 2014 at 01:54:54PM +0200, Alexandre Belloni wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> On 25/08/2014 at 12:15:23 +0200, Thierry Reding wrote :
> > On Fri, Mar 14, 2014 at 08:05:31PM +0100, Alexandre Belloni wrote:
> > > pwm-leds calls .config() and .disable() in a row. This exhibits that it may
> > > happen that the channel gets disabled before CDTY has been updated with CUPD.
> > > The issue gets quite worse with long periods.
> > > So, ensure by reading ISR that at least one period has past before disabling the
> > > channel.
> > > 
> > > The other issue is that it may happen that CUPD is not flushed before enabling
> > > the channel so it will update CDTY/CPRD just after one period. So we always set
> > > CUPD, even when the channel is not enabled.
> > > 
> > > Tested on at91sam9g45 and sama5d31ek.
> > > 
> > > Signed-off-by: Alexandre Belloni <alexandre.belloni@...e-electrons.com>
> > > ---
> > >  drivers/pwm/pwm-atmel.c | 46 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-----------------
> > >  1 file changed, 29 insertions(+), 17 deletions(-)
> > 
> > going through the list of unapplied patches I came across this old
> > patch. It was never reviewed nor acked by anyone and you didn't ping me,
> > so I always assumed it must no longer be required. Is that so?
> > 
> 
> It is still required but Nicolas is not happy with the polling on
> PWM_ISR and he was supposed to discuss that internally with the IP
> designer to understand if there is a better way.
> 
> I'll either ping on that one or send a new version when I'll know a bit
> more.

Okay, thanks.

Thierry

Content of type "application/pgp-signature" skipped