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:   Tue, 29 Nov 2016 07:48:04 -0800
From:   Tony Lindgren <tony@...mide.com>
To:     Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>
Cc:     Lee Jones <lee.jones@...aro.org>,
        Samuel Ortiz <sameo@...ux.intel.com>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        linux-omap <linux-omap@...r.kernel.org>,
        "devicetree@...r.kernel.org" <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
        Marcel Partap <mpartap@....net>,
        Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
        Michael Scott <michael.scott@...aro.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mfd: cpcap: Add minimal support

* Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org> [161129 07:20]:
> On Thu, Nov 24, 2016 at 2:59 AM, Lee Jones <lee.jones@...aro.org> wrote:
> > On Wed, 23 Nov 2016, Tony Lindgren wrote:
> >
> >> * Lee Jones <lee.jones@...aro.org> [161121 03:43]:
> >> > On Fri, 18 Nov 2016, Tony Lindgren wrote:
> >> > > --- a/drivers/mfd/Makefile
> >> > > +++ b/drivers/mfd/Makefile
> >> > > @@ -97,6 +97,7 @@ obj-$(CONFIG_MFD_MC13XXX_I2C)   += mc13xxx-i2c.o
> >> > >  obj-$(CONFIG_MFD_CORE)           += mfd-core.o
> >> > >
> >> > >  obj-$(CONFIG_EZX_PCAP)           += ezx-pcap.o
> >> > > +obj-$(CONFIG_MFD_CPCAP)          += cpcap.o
> >> >
> >> > Who is the manufacturer?
> >>
> >> Hmm that I don't know. There seems to be both ST and TI versions
> >> of this chip manufactured for Motorola. So my guess is that it
> >> should be Motorola unless there's some similar catalog part
> >> available from ST used by others. If anybody has more info
> >> on this please let me know :)
> >
> > If this IP is shared amongst vendors, it usually means it was designed
> > by someone else?  Synopsis perhaps?
> 
> xCAP names originated from Motorola cellular group with parts (going
> back to analog/2G days) coming from Motorola Semi, TI, and ST it
> seems. All individually developed AFAIK.

OK thanks. Looking at the Motorola Linux kernel source, the child
device drivers do test for both revision and vendor and apply
different workarounds based on that. It also seems that CPCAP is
only used on Motorola devices.

So based on the above, we should call it motorola-cpcap with just
a secondary device tree compatible string for the STE part numbers.

Regards,

Tony

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ