linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH for-next] spi: bcm53xx: add spi_flash

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: <20160418115731.GX3217@sirena.org.uk>
Date:	Mon, 18 Apr 2016 12:57:31 +0100
From:	Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
To:	Rafał Miłecki <zajec5@...il.com>
Cc:	"linux-mtd@...ts.infradead.org" <linux-mtd@...ts.infradead.org>,
	Vignesh R <vigneshr@...com>,
	Brian Norris <computersforpeace@...il.com>,
	"open list:SPI SUBSYSTEM" <linux-spi@...r.kernel.org>,
	open list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH for-next] spi: bcm53xx: add spi_flash_read callback for
 MMIO-based reads

On Mon, Apr 18, 2016 at 01:38:28PM +0200, Rafał Miłecki wrote:

> What shall we do if spi_flash_read fails? Should we always fallback to
> the standard SPI flash read? Or should we standarize error codes
> returned by spi_flash_read and fallback on some particular error code
> only?

I'm not sure, probably just fall back all the time.

Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (474 bytes)