linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v5 2/2] mtd: rawnand: use bit-wise majority to recover the contents of ONFI parameter

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]

Date:   Tue, 15 May 2018 10:46:00 +0300
From:   Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@...il.com>
To:     Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@...tlin.com>
Cc:     Shreeya Patel <shreeya.patel23498@...il.com>,
        Masahiro Yamada <yamada.masahiro@...ionext.com>,
        Jane Wan <Jane.Wan@...ia.com>,
        Miquel Raynal <miquel.raynal@...tlin.com>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Marek Vasut <marek.vasut@...il.com>, ties.bos@...ia.com,
        prabhakar.kushwaha@....com,
        "open list:MEMORY TECHNOLOGY..." <linux-mtd@...ts.infradead.org>,
        jagdish.gediya@....com, Richard Weinberger <richard@....at>,
        Shawn Guo <shawnguo@...nel.org>,
        Brian Norris <computersforpeace@...il.com>,
        David Woodhouse <dwmw2@...radead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 2/2] mtd: rawnand: use bit-wise majority to recover the
 contents of ONFI parameter

On Tue, May 15, 2018 at 10:35 AM, Boris Brezillon
<boris.brezillon@...tlin.com> wrote:
> On Mon, 14 May 2018 20:54:36 +0300
> Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@...il.com> wrote:
>
>> On Thu, May 10, 2018 at 3:03 PM, Boris Brezillon
>> <boris.brezillon@...tlin.com> wrote:
>>
>> >> +#define GET_BIT(bit, val)   (((val) >> (bit)) & 0x01)
>> >
>> > Not sure we need that macro, see below.
>>
>> +1. We have too many nice helpers for bit manipulations
>> (for_each_set_bit() as an example).
>>
>>
>> >                         for (k = 0; k < nbufs; k++) {
>> >                                 const u8 *srcbuf = srcbufs[j];
>> >
>> >                                 if (srcbuf[i] & BIT(k))
>> >                                         m++;
>> >                         }
>>
>> ...which is effectively hweightXX().
>
> No it's not.

I don't see how "not". In the loop everithing except m and k are
invariants. What did I miss?

The powerness of two of nbufs is another thing of _existing_
prototypes of hweightXX().

-- 
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko