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: <20181004162232.5ac363be@bbrezillon>
Date:   Thu, 4 Oct 2018 16:22:32 +0200
From:   Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@...tlin.com>
To:     Janusz Krzysztofik <jmkrzyszt@...il.com>
Cc:     Miquel Raynal <miquel.raynal@...tlin.com>,
        Richard Weinberger <richard@....at>,
        David Woodhouse <dwmw2@...radead.org>,
        Brian Norris <computersforpeace@...il.com>,
        Marek Vasut <marek.vasut@...il.com>,
        linux-mtd@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] mtd: rawnand: ams-delta: use ->exec_op()

On Thu, 04 Oct 2018 16:11:42 +0200
Janusz Krzysztofik <jmkrzyszt@...il.com> wrote:

> 
> Legacy nand_wait_ready() uses a hardcoded timeout value of 400 ms.   Should we 
> follow the same approach in nand_gpio_waitrdy(), or should we rather let 
> drivers pass the timeout value, like in case of nand_soft_waitrdy()?

The latter.

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ