linux-kernel - [RFC/RFT PATCH] Revert "ASoC: fsl_esai: ETDR and TX0~5 registers are non volatile"

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-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Thu,  6 Jun 2019 16:01:05 -0700
From:   Nicolin Chen <nicoleotsuka@...il.com>
To:     shengjiu.wang@....com, broonie@...nel.org
Cc:     timur@...nel.org, Xiubo.Lee@...il.com, festevam@...il.com,
        lgirdwood@...il.com, perex@...ex.cz, tiwai@...e.com,
        alsa-devel@...a-project.org, linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: [RFC/RFT PATCH] Revert "ASoC: fsl_esai: ETDR and TX0~5 registers are non volatile"

This reverts commit 8973112aa41b8ad956a5b47f2fe17bc2a5cf2645.

ETDR and TX0~5 are TX data registers. There are a couple of reasons
to revert the change:
1) Though ETDR and TX0~5 are not volatile but write-only registers,
   they should not be cached either. According to the definition of
   "volatile_reg", one should be put in the volatile list if it can
   not be cached.
2) When doing regcache_sync(), the operation may accidentally write
   some "dirty" data into these registers, in case that cached data
   happen to be different from the default ones. It may also result
   in a channel shift/swap situation since the number of write-via-
   sync operations at ETDR would unlikely match the channel number.

Note: this revert is not a complete revert as it keeps those macros
of registers remaining in the default value list while the original
commit also changed other entries in the list. And this patch isn't
very necessary to Cc stable tree since there has been always a FIFO
reset operation around the regcache_sync() call, even prior to this
reverted commit.

Signed-off-by: Nicolin Chen <nicoleotsuka@...il.com>
Cc: Shengjiu Wang <shengjiu.wang@....com>
---
Hi Mark,
In case there's no objection against the patch, I'd still like to
wait for a Tested-by from NXP folks before submitting it. Thanks!

 sound/soc/fsl/fsl_esai.c | 14 +++++++-------
 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)

diff --git a/sound/soc/fsl/fsl_esai.c b/sound/soc/fsl/fsl_esai.c
index 10d2210c91ef..8f0a86335f73 100644
--- a/sound/soc/fsl/fsl_esai.c
+++ b/sound/soc/fsl/fsl_esai.c
@@ -652,16 +652,9 @@ static const struct snd_soc_component_driver fsl_esai_component = {
 };

 static const struct reg_default fsl_esai_reg_defaults[] = {
-	{REG_ESAI_ETDR,	 0x00000000},
 	{REG_ESAI_ECR,	 0x00000000},
 	{REG_ESAI_TFCR,	 0x00000000},
 	{REG_ESAI_RFCR,	 0x00000000},
-	{REG_ESAI_TX0,	 0x00000000},
-	{REG_ESAI_TX1,	 0x00000000},
-	{REG_ESAI_TX2,	 0x00000000},
-	{REG_ESAI_TX3,	 0x00000000},
-	{REG_ESAI_TX4,	 0x00000000},
-	{REG_ESAI_TX5,	 0x00000000},
 	{REG_ESAI_TSR,	 0x00000000},
 	{REG_ESAI_SAICR, 0x00000000},
 	{REG_ESAI_TCR,	 0x00000000},
@@ -711,10 +704,17 @@ static bool fsl_esai_readable_reg(struct device *dev, unsigned int reg)
 static bool fsl_esai_volatile_reg(struct device *dev, unsigned int reg)
 {
 	switch (reg) {
+	case REG_ESAI_ETDR:
 	case REG_ESAI_ERDR:
 	case REG_ESAI_ESR:
 	case REG_ESAI_TFSR:
 	case REG_ESAI_RFSR:
+	case REG_ESAI_TX0:
+	case REG_ESAI_TX1:
+	case REG_ESAI_TX2:
+	case REG_ESAI_TX3:
+	case REG_ESAI_TX4:
+	case REG_ESAI_TX5:
 	case REG_ESAI_RX0:
 	case REG_ESAI_RX1:
 	case REG_ESAI_RX2:
-- 
2.17.1