linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/2] tty: pl011: Work around QDF2400 E44 stuck BUSY bit

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: <e16986de-31fa-8d34-05be-aa8a585500d4@codeaurora.org>
Date:   Wed, 8 Feb 2017 08:09:12 -0600
From:   Timur Tabi <timur@...eaurora.org>
To:     Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>
Cc:     Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@....com>,
        Christopher Covington <cov@...eaurora.org>,
        Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>,
        Marc Zyngier <marc.zyngier@....com>,
        Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
        Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>, linux-doc@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        shankerd@...eaurora.org,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        Jiri Slaby <jslaby@...e.com>,
        Russell King <linux@...linux.org.uk>,
        linux-serial@...r.kernel.org, Jon Masters <jcm@...hat.com>,
        Neil Leeder <nleeder@...eaurora.org>,
        Mark Langsdorf <mlangsdo@...hat.com>,
        Mark Salter <msalter@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] tty: pl011: Work around QDF2400 E44 stuck BUSY bit

Mark Rutland wrote:

>> No, only Kryo and Falkor V1 based SOCs have this problem.  Falkor V2
>> will have this fixed.  We intend to revert these fixes after Falkor
>> V1 SOCs are no longer supported.
>
> Supported by whom?

Qualcomm.

> Generally, once something's upstreamed we expect it to remain supported.

The V1 SOCs are technically pre-production, but still in wide use and it will be 
a while before they are all replaced by V2 SOCs.  It's only because of the 
"ugliness" of the erratum and its work-around that we want to git rid of it when 
we can.

Cov is better equipped to answer your other questions.

-- 
Sent by an employee of the Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc.
The Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of the
Code Aurora Forum, hosted by The Linux Foundation.