linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH V2 RESEND] clk: mxs: Fix invalid 32-bit access to frac registers

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: <201502102307.51740.marex@denx.de>
Date:	Tue, 10 Feb 2015 23:07:51 +0100
From:	Marek Vasut <marex@...x.de>
To:	Fabio Estevam <festevam@...il.com>
Cc:	Stefan Wahren <stefan.wahren@...e.com>,
	Sascha Hauer <kernel@...gutronix.de>,
	"linux-kernel" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Shawn Guo <shawn.guo@...aro.org>,
	Mike Turquette <mturquette@...aro.org>,
	"linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org" 
	<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>, Zhi Li <lznuaa@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH V2 RESEND] clk: mxs: Fix invalid 32-bit access to frac registers

On Tuesday, February 10, 2015 at 10:54:52 PM, Fabio Estevam wrote:
> Hi Stefan,
> 
> On Tue, Feb 10, 2015 at 7:24 PM, Stefan Wahren <stefan.wahren@...e.com> wrote:
> > thanks this is very helpful. I built the linux-next for my Duckbill and
> > add the SSP2 section from imx28-evk.dts into imx28-duckbill.dts.
> > 
> > Without my patch i get the following for HW_CLKCTRL_FRAC0:
> > 
> > ./memwatch -a 0x800401B0
> > 
> > 0x800401b0: 0x5e5b5513
> > 
> > With my patch i get:
> > 
> > ./memwatch -a 0x800401B0
> > 
> > 0x800401b0: 0x5e1b5513
> > 
> > So it looks like a problem in my patch.
> 
> Yes, let's try to get the same value HW_CLKCTRL_FRAC0.
> 
> > I orded such a flash chip, but it will take some time until i can use it
> > with my hardware.
> 
> Thanks for doing this.
> 
> Maybe if you find out a way to fix the calculation of
> HW_CLKCTRL_FRAC0, then I can test it on my board.

Hi,

the difference is this 0x40 bit, right ? That's _STABLE bit, so it means
the clock are not stable, right ? Why would that happen in the first place?

Best regards,
Marek Vasut
--
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/