linux-kernel - RE: [v3 3/3] serial: 8250_dw: Add UPF_SKIP

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:	Wed, 12 Aug 2015 15:51:05 +0000
From:	Noam Camus <noamc@...hip.com>
To:	Peter Hurley <peter@...leysoftware.com>
CC:	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"linux-serial@...r.kernel.org" <linux-serial@...r.kernel.org>,
	"gregkh@...uxfoundation.org" <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
	"jslaby@...e.com" <jslaby@...e.com>,
	"robh+dt@...nel.org" <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
	"pawel.moll@....com" <pawel.moll@....com>,
	"mark.rutland@....com" <mark.rutland@....com>,
	"ijc+devicetree@...lion.org.uk" <ijc+devicetree@...lion.org.uk>,
	"@codeaurora.orggalak@...eaurora.org" 
	<IMCEAINVALID-+40codeaurora+2Eorggalak+40codeaurora+2Eorg@...prd02.prod.outlook.com>,
	"fransklaver@...il.com" <fransklaver@...il.com>,
	"Alexey.Brodkin@...opsys.com" <Alexey.Brodkin@...opsys.com>,
	"vgupta@...opsys.com" <vgupta@...opsys.com>
Subject: RE: [v3 3/3] serial: 8250_dw: Add UPF_SKIP_TEST to flags depend on
 device tree

> From: Peter Hurley [mailto:peter@...leysoftware.com] 
> Sent: Wednesday, August 12, 2015 4:17 PM

> I think Greg's question about the simulator still applies: why upstream this?
> The simulator is not even identified so how is someone supposed to know this workaround applies?

> The fact there are no in-tree DT users of this workaround argues against its acceptance.

I am using UART peripheral for Synopsys simulator same as one used by arch/arc/plat-sim
I know this platform do not use CONFIG_SERIAL_8250_DW due to some problem I suspect it is relate to the loop test.

Maybe Vineet Gupta or Alexey Brodkin from Synopsys which are CC here can comment.

So It just happen for me to be a pioneer with this.

More than that "no-loopback-test" is an option already exist for core 8250, and since DW is only an extension for this driver it should also benefit from this option.

If all this is yet not enough, should I re-send this "patch set" again without this specific patch?

Regards,
Noam Camus