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  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, 18 Sep 2014 16:59:05 -0700
From:	eric ernst <>
To:	Mika Westerberg <>,
	Samuel Ortiz <>
CC:	Loic Poulain <>,,,,
Subject: Re: [PATCHv2] pinctrl: baytrail: Clear DIRECT_IRQ bit

On 14-09-18 02:55 AM, Mika Westerberg wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 18, 2014 at 11:41:13AM +0200, Samuel Ortiz wrote:
>> Hi Mika,
>> On Thu, Sep 18, 2014 at 10:49:43AM +0300, Mika Westerberg wrote:
>>> On Wed, Sep 17, 2014 at 03:47:01PM +0200, Loic Poulain wrote:
>>>> Direct Irq En bit can be initialized to a bad value.
>>>> This bit has to be cleared for io access mode.
>>> +Eric
>>> I would like to have a bit better explanation *why* this bit needs to be
>>> cleared.
>>> Also want to ask Eric (who added the WARN()), is there something
>>> preventing us to do this? I remember last time you said that we are not
>>> supposed to change this bit runtime.
>>> My preference is that we get rid of the WARN() and just unconditionally
>>> clear the bit.
>> I'd keep the warn though, as it most likely shows a buggy firmware
>> implementation.
> Fair enough :)
> Maybe it could be more informative.
Agreed - I think its safest to say "you're shooting yourself in the 
foot," rather than reinforcing what we think are the right pad settings.
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

Powered by blists - more mailing lists