linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/2] mfd: intel_soc_pmic: Differentiate between Bay and Cherry Trail CRC variants

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: <20170718071725.irultqetstthnozh@dell>
Date:   Tue, 18 Jul 2017 08:17:25 +0100
From:   Lee Jones <lee.jones@...aro.org>
To:     Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>
Cc:     Hans de Goede <hdegoede@...hat.com>,
        Jarkko Nikula <jarkko.nikula@...ux.intel.com>,
        Len Brown <lenb@...nel.org>,
        Mika Westerberg <mika.westerberg@...ux.intel.com>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] mfd: intel_soc_pmic: Differentiate between Bay and
 Cherry Trail CRC variants

On Mon, 17 Jul 2017, Andy Shevchenko wrote:

> On Mon, 2017-07-17 at 11:59 +0100, Lee Jones wrote:
> > On Sat, 01 Jul 2017, Hans de Goede wrote:
> > 
> > > Both Bay and Cherry Trail devices may be used together with a
> > > Crystal Cove
> > > PMIC. Each platform has its own variant of the PMIC, which both use
> > > the
> > > same ACPI HID, but they are not 100% compatible.
> > > 
> > > This commits makes the intel_soc_pmic_core code check the _HRV of
> > > the
> > > ACPI-firmware-node and selects intel_soc_pmic_config_byt_crc resp.
> > > intel_soc_pmic_config_cht_crc based on this.
> > > 
> > > This fixes the Bay Trail specific ACPI OpRegion code causing
> > > problems
> > > on Cherry Trail devices. Specifically this was causing the external
> > > microsd slot on a Dell Venue 8 5855 (Cherry Trail version) to not
> > > work
> > > and the eMMC to become unreliable and throw lots of errors.
> > > 
> > > Reported-and-tested-by: russianneuromancer <russianneuromancer@...ru
> > > >
> > 
> > Real names only please.
> > 
> > What is the name of this reporter/tester?
> 
> No one knows, I think.

Then I don't think we can credit him/her for their efforts.
SubmittingPatches clearly states "no pseudonyms or anonymous
contributions".  Either write to them and ask for their real name so
that they can be credited, or remove the line.

-- 
Lee Jones
Linaro STMicroelectronics Landing Team Lead
Linaro.org │ Open source software for ARM SoCs
Follow Linaro: Facebook | Twitter | Blog