linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v5 08/12] xhci: Add Intel extended cap / otg phy mux handling

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <070f5ccd-dfeb-1e47-681a-8e116472ef9f@redhat.com>
Date:   Wed, 28 Feb 2018 16:42:32 +0100
From:   Hans de Goede <hdegoede@...hat.com>
To:     Heikki Krogerus <heikki.krogerus@...ux.intel.com>
Cc:     Darren Hart <dvhart@...radead.org>,
        Andy Shevchenko <andy@...radead.org>,
        MyungJoo Ham <myungjoo.ham@...sung.com>,
        Chanwoo Choi <cw00.choi@...sung.com>,
        Mathias Nyman <mathias.nyman@...el.com>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net>,
        platform-driver-x86@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-usb@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 08/12] xhci: Add Intel extended cap / otg phy mux
 handling

Hi,

On 28-02-18 16:15, Heikki Krogerus wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 28, 2018 at 04:07:45PM +0100, Hans de Goede wrote:
>> diff --git a/drivers/usb/host/xhci.h b/drivers/usb/host/xhci.h
>> index 96099a245c69..5917e3095e2a 100644
>> --- a/drivers/usb/host/xhci.h
>> +++ b/drivers/usb/host/xhci.h
>> @@ -1825,6 +1825,7 @@ struct xhci_hcd {
>>   /* Reserved. It was XHCI_U2_DISABLE_WAKE */
>>   #define XHCI_ASMEDIA_MODIFY_FLOWCONTROL	(1 << 28)
>>   #define XHCI_HW_LPM_DISABLE	(1 << 29)
>> +#define XHCI_INTEL_USB_ROLE_SW	(1 << 30)
> 
> Did you rebased these on tope of the latest usb-next?

No I did not expect that to be necessary, but I see now that it is.
I've just done a rebase locally, any other remarks before I send
out a v6?

> This does not
> apply cleanly on top of linux-next.

Regards,

Hans